
Class C 



!ij^6M 



Book 



.C ^sPf< \ 



Digitized by tlie Internet Arcliive 
in 2010 witli funding from 
Tlie Library of Congress 



Iittp://www.arcliive.org/details/reportjuly11912d01penn 




Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 



FINAL REPORT 



Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree 
Blight Commission 



JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 15, 1913 



1112 Morris Building, 1421 Chestnut Street, 
PHILADELPHIA, PA. 




HAERISBUKG, PA.: 
WM. STANLEY RAY, STATE PEINTB3R 

1914 



SC a; 




Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 



FINAL REPORT 



OF THE _^ 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree 
Blight Commission 



JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 15, 1913 



1112 Morris Building, 1421 Chestnut Street, 
PHILADELPHIA, PA. 




HARRTSBURG-, PA.: 

WM. STANLEY RAl, STATE PRINTER 

1914 



PA 







^atF B.- 
DEC 2 ?914 






I 



Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight 
Commission 



MEMBERS OP COMMISSION 

Winthrop Sargent, Chairman Bryn Mawr 

Harold Peirce, Secretary Haverford 

Samuel T. Bodine Villa Nova 

George F. Craig, ; .Rosemont 

Theodore N. Ely Bryn Mawr 



EXECUTIVE STAFF 

Mark Alfred Carleton, General Manager 
Samuel B. DetwUer, General Superintendent 
Oliver D. Schock, Assistant General Superintendent 
Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District 
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District 
David T. McCampbeU, Chief Clerk 



Irvin 0. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator 



SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF 

Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist 

A. G. Ruggles, Entomologist 

J. P. Wentling, Forester in charge of Utilization 

Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist 

F. P. Gulliver, Geographer 

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication 

Joseph Shrawder, Chemist 

Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon 

Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work 



(1) 



^ 



(2) 



Contents 



Page. 

Advance spot blight infections ; treatment of various plats, 76-79 

Ants as carriers of blight spores ; experiments with, 44 

Bast-miner ; relation of insect to dissemination of blight, 45 

Seattle, Px-of. R. Kent; Bibliography of the chestnut bark disease, 95-121 

Bibliography of the chestnut bark disease, 95-121 

Blight investigation and inspection of chestnut nurseries, 40 

Blighted sprouts around stumps of trees cut at Hummelstown, 90 

Burning over chestnut tree stumps; statement of results, 77 

Carbon county, (Mahoning Valley), blight conditions, 64 

Carleton, Mark A., General Manager, Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight 

Commission ; Final report of, 27 

Cicada sting wounds favorable for spread of chestnut bark disease, 45 

Chemical investigations in connection with blight, 47 

Chestnut trees a valuable factor in Pennsylvania forest wealth, 10 

Chestnut trees , rapid growth of, 10 

Chestnut trees in Pennsylvania ; threatened extermination of, 10 

Chestnut cord-wood, reduced freight rates on, 57 

Chestnut nursery stock ; regulations governing shipments of, 91 

Chestnut orchards and nurseries, protection of against blight, 29 

Chestnut bark disease ; fake remedies for, 30 

Chestnut trees, various diseases of, 42 

Chestnut tree medication , results of, 48 

Chestnut tree blight exhibits at museums and schools, 58 

Chestnut timber ; deterioration of blighted , 56 

Chestnut tree blight ; methods of dissemination, 63 

Chestnut tree blight ; combatting the fungus, 10 

Chestnut trees ; products of blighted trees marketable, 11 

Chestnut tree blight ; how destructive pest was spread, 11 

Chestnut tree blight; discovery of its prevalence in China, 28 

Chestnut Tree Blight Commission; active work suspended with regret, 12 

Chestnut tree blight infection in Western District, 37 

Chestnut tree blight ; first report of appearance in Pennsylvania filed by 

Harold Peirce, of Haverford, Montgomery county, 17 

Chestnut tree blight in Wildwood Park, Harrisburg; successful treatment of, 30 

Chestnut tree blight exhibits ; where made , 32 

Co-operative work of XJ. S. Department of Agriculture and Pennsylvania 

State Forestry Department, 33 

Creosoting peeled chestnut stumps; tabulated results of, 78 

Cutting-out process ; effectiveness of treatment of method, 27 

Detwiler, Samuel B., Superintendent. Keports of observations on sanita- 
tion cutting of blighted chestnut areas, 63 

Discovery of chestnut bark disease in China , 28 

Eastern Pennsylvania blight conditions, 67 

Eradicating the chestnut blight ; estimated cost of operations, 78 

Field work of scouts and valuable results obtained, 36 

Field work in Eastern District, report relating to, gg 

Field laboratory work and special investigations , 43 

Galls on chestnut and relation to blight infections, 47 

(3) 



4 

Page. 

Geographical wo rk ; report of observations, 52 

Gulliver, Dr. F. P., Geographer; Report of geographic work, 52 

Harmless saprophyte in Western Pennsylvania , , 38 

Heald, Dr. F. D., Pathologist; Investigations of tree diseases, .40 

Regulations for chestnut nursery inspections , '93 

History of early efforts to eradicate blight in Pennsylvania, 17 

Infection of chestnut in Western Pennsylvania ; tabulated report, 37 

Infection centres on advance line of the blight, 71 

Infection at Orbisonia, Huntingdon county; tabular statement, 72 

Insects ; beneficial by destroying spores of blight, 28 

Insects as carriers of the chestnut blight spores, 42 

Insect investigations; valuable facts ascertained by, 44 

Law, amendment to chestnut blight, 94 

Legislative action to control blight in Pennsylvania recommended, 22 

Lime-sulphur solution to prevent spread of blight, 51 

Local field work; how conducted in generally infected districts, 40 

Main Line Citizens' Association ; valuable services rendered by, 19 

Message from the Governor suggesting legislative help, 21 

Mickleborough, Dr. John W. ; combatting the chestnut blight, 19 

Murrill, Prof. W. A.; plan proposed to combat chestnut blight, "23 

Nursery inspections ; regulating shipment of nursery stock, 28 

Nursery chestnut stock ; list of inspections, 43 

Oflicial letter from the Commission to Governor Tener, 9 

Official report of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, 9-13 

Origin of the chestnut blight disease, 11 

Oldest infections located near New York City, 9 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, Members of, 1 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission ; Executive Staff of, 1 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission ; Scientific and operative 

staff, 1 

Pennsylvania initial State to combat spread of blight, 10 

Pierce, Roy G., Tree Surgeon; Report of tree surgery work, 50 

Production of blight spores, 41 

Publications relating to the chestnut blight, list of, 95 

Publicity work; valuable assistance rendered by newspapers, 59 

Publications issued by the Commission ; reports and bulletins, 33 

Pycnospores and ascospores ; development and dissemination of, 42 

Reinspections for blight ; notes on , 86 

Relation of soils to prevalence of blight, 52 

Resistant and immume chestnut stocks ; search for, 32 

Rockey, Keller E. ; Report of public demonstration work, 57 

Rumbold, Dr. Caroline; Experiments in chestnut tree medication, 48 

Ruggles, Prof. A. G. ; Report of results of special insect investigations, 44 

Sargent, Winthrop, Secretary of Commission ; final official report of, 9 

Schock, Oliver D., Assistant Superintendent; valuable co-operative work of 

the press acknowledged , 60 

Scientific research; prompt and thorough work urged, 12 

Scouting for the chestnut blight, 73 

Shrawder, Joseph, Chemist; Report of chemical investigations, 47 

Spot infections ; procedure to eradicate, 73 

Suggestions for information of chestnut timber owners, 38 

Tener, Hon. John K., Governor; message to the Legislature relative to the 

chestnut blight disease, 21 

Topton Mountain, Berks county; study of blight conditions, 68 



5 

Page. 

Treatment of infected timber and disposal of lumber, 38 

Treatment of infected cbestnut areas, 74 

Tree surgery ; examinations made and results of operations, 50 

Unfinished work of Commission ; experiments in progress and work con- 
templated , 34 

TJtOization of bliglited chestnut a serious problem, 54 

Value of chestnut destroyed in Pennsylvania, 59 

Williams, Hon. Irvin C, Deputy Commissioner of Forestry; Keport as 

Collaborator of Pennsylvania Department of Forestry, 17 

Wentling, Prof. J. P.; Report upon utilization of blighted chestnut, 54 



# 
^ 



'^^m^^ 



(6) 



Official Letter 
to 

Hon. John K. Tener 

Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 



(7) 



^^ 



(8) 




Scouting for the chestnut tree blight. 



LETTEE OF TEANSMITTAL. 



THE COMMISSION FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND CONTROL 
OF THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT IN PENNSYLVANIA 

1H2 Morris Building, Broad and Chestnut Streets 

PMladelphia, December 9th, 1913. 
HON. JOHN K. TENER, Governor, 

Harrishurg, Penna. 

8ir: We have the honor to transmit herewith our report of the 
operations of this Commission for a portion of the year 1913, this 
being also the final report of the Commission. 

Eastern Asia, the home of the San Jose scale, has been found to 
be also the home of the chestnut blight. The disease has been found 
definitely in northeastern China; probably it is also present in 
Japan. There is no reason to doubt that it found its way to this 
country in the same way that the San Jose scale did, on nursery 
stock, and at about the same time, or perhaps somewhat later. Any 
system of strict inspection of imported nursery stock could have 
kept it out of this country, but no such system was then in use. 
It would probably not have been possible at that time to secure a 
law authorizing such inspection because of the lack of public ap- 
preciation of the seriousness of imported fungous and insect epi- 
demics. 

The oldest known spots of chestnut blight infection are in the 
neighborhood of New York City. Here again the disease could have 
been chocked at an early date and never found its way into Penn- 
sylvania, but nothing of the sort was even attempted. In fact, 
even up to 1911, no official work was done in New York upon the 
disease. In 1908 Murrill* advocated cutting out all chestnut trees 
within half a mile of diseased trees, but this plan was never put into 
practice in New York. In general, the greatest conservatism has 
prevailed regarding the seriousness of the disease. The view that 
the fungus was native to America, and its great virulence due to 
winter injury and other temporary climatic effects upon the trees, 
has been strenuously advocated. The Commission from the first, 
however, adopted the theory of the Department of Agriculture that 
the disease was of foreign origin and hence to be considered in 
the light of a dangerous invader. This view has since been amply 

♦Journal of the New York Botanical Garden, Vol. 9, No. 98, p. 30. 

(9.) 



10 

justifled. Pennsylvania was the first state to treat the epidemic 
seriously, but by the time the Commission -vvas able to begin work 
the disease was spread over the eastern half of the State too com- 
pletely to make its eradication there possible. 

Twenty years ago such an epidemic as the present one would 
have attracted little attention, but now the prices of all classes of 
timber have been for some years increasing, and promise to continue 
to increase indefinitely. It is obvious that every possible care must 
be taken of the present forest stand; upon this point there is no 
longer disagreement. In Pennsylvania the chestnut is especially 
valuable, standing in intimate relation to many of the leading indus- 
tries of the State. It is distributed throughout the State, compris- 
ing at least one- fifth, possibly one- third, of the timber. It is naturally 
adapted to poor, hilly land not suited for agriculture, and will pro- 
duce profitable yields of extract wood, fence posts, rails, etc., in 25 
to 30 years; and ties, poles, and saw timber in 40 to 50 years. Be- 
cause of its comparatively rapid growth, its superior ability to 
perpetuate itself by means of sprouts, and the great variety of its 
uses, the chestnut may be considered the most important forest 
tree in the State. The ease with which chestnut can be managed 
according to the principles of forestry made it, before the appear- 
ance of the blight, one of the principal species depended upon to 
solve the problem of the future timber supply of the State. On 
steep slopes, where the per cent, of chestnut is high, serious de- 
terioration, washing of the soil, and reduction in water supply will 
undoubtedly follow the destruction of the chestnut trees. 

The complete loss of the present commercial stand of chestnut in 
Pennsylvania, which, now that the Commission has ceased work, 
seems absolutely certain, is a calamity which will be fully realized 
only in the future. In matters of this kind we have obligations to 
the future, aside from the particular emergency in hand. This is not 
the last tree disease that will sweep over the State. All efforts 
to control this disease would be justified even if we only learned how 
to control the next one. Methods which may not be practicable 
now will be highly practicable twenty years from now on account 
of the steady increase which is bound to come in timber values. The 
mere fact that this campaign against the chestnut blight has been 
undertaken at all shows a great advance of thought over that of 
previous years. 

With these facts in mind, it is obvious that three courses were 
possible, when the extent and seriousness of the chestnut blight was 
first realized in Pennsylvania. 

First, — Do nothing. 

Second, — Conduct scientific investigations of the disease with the 



11 

hope of determining by laboratory methods and very small field ex- 
periments some method of control. 

Third, — Conduct scientific investigations, and at the same time 
immediately attack the epidemic by any and every means that seemed 
to afford any possibility of checking or even delaying the course of 
the disease. To follow the first method would have been to emulate 
simply the example of New York and New Jersey. The second 
course had many points in its favor, but it was obvious that such a 
course would yield no results in time to be used on the present epi- 
demic, though possibly of the largest ultimate value. The third 
course appealed to the Commission as the only one possible under 
existing circumstances. The greatest handicap was the extent to 
which the disease was already present in the State. 

In the eastern half of the State the disease was obviously beyond 
control. In the western half the best course available, and in fact 
the only method that has been proposed at all for control of the 
disease, was that of cutting out the advance infections. While this 
method is open to many criticisms, nothing better has been proposed 
even to the present time. The Commission adopted the cutting out 
methods advocated by the U. S. Department of Agriculture with two 
exceptions: (1) Spots of considerable size were cut out in some 
cases; that is, the cuttings were not limited to strictly advance in- 
fections. (2). No immune zone was established at first, although 
this might have been done later. The method was essentially that 
advocated by Murrill in 1908, except that trees were not cut to as 
great a distance as half a mile from the source of infection. Detailed 
reports of the cutting out work are appended. It is sufiicient to say 
here that the progress of the disease in the western half of the State 
has been set back five years, and west of the line extending from 
Bradford to Somerset counties there is little infection, and what in- 
fection there is dates from 1913. There is no reasonable doubt that 
the disease could have been kept instatu quo indefinitely, had the 
work of cutting out continued. As set forth in the appended reports, 
the methods of cutting out have been improved, the cost determined 
and reduced, and winter scouting established as a practical method. 
These methods developed by the Commission are now in active use 
in the States of Virginia and West Virginia, where the campaign of 
eradication is being vigorously pursued. 

One of the most valuable results of the Commission's work was 
the establishment of the fact that the wood of a blighted tree is en- 
tirely fit for use, and if utilized soon after the death of the tree 
from blight, can be disposed of in the regular way and at normal 
values. The Commission has advocated the cutting out of all dis- 
eased trees, since on account of the prejudice against blighted poles 



12 

and timber, and the possibility of the market becoming glutted, this 
is the best plan. Also the cutting of diseased trees was urged be- 
cause it would reduce the sources of infection. Since utilization 
was all that remained to be done in the eastern half of the State, the 
Commission secured a special reduced freight rate on blighted lum- 
ber, determined what demand there was in and out of the State for 
chestnut lumber and other chestnut products, and proceeded to bring 
owners and dealers together. This work had just reached the point 
of its highest efficiency when the Commission ceased work. As there 
is no longer any means of inspection and certification of diseased 
lumber, the reduced freight rate is no longer available. 

When the Commission began work but few investigations had 
been made of the chestnut blight, and other States, as well as the 
U. S. Department of Agriculture, were working on the disease with- 
out special funds. The Commission by its example and by its direct 
efforts, assisted in securing Congressional and State appropriations, 
and practically all of the scientific work and all of the practical 
work which has been done on this disease since 1910 was made pos- 
sible by the efforts of this Commission. A National law was passed 
which requires strict inspection of all imported nursery stock and 
the prohibition from entry of certain classes of stock, and which 
makes the repetition of such an event as the importation of the 
chestnut blight impossible, or at least highly improbable. The 
work of this Commission was one of the greatest factors in bringing 
about the passage of this law. 

Not only has the work of the Commission aroused public attention 
throughout the Eastern States regarding this disease, but the public 
is awakened as never before by the example of the destruction of one 
species to the necessity of conservation of all timber resources. In 
this State the Commission has carried on a liberal educational cam- 
paign in which it has had the hearty co-operation of the State 
Forestry Department, the Conservation Association, such organiza- 
tions as the Boy Scouts, various lumber and trade associations, and 
tnany other organizations, institutions, and individuals. 

In conclusion, it seems necessary to call sharp attention to the 
real lesson to be learned from the chestnut blight epidemic — viz.: 
the necessity of more scientific research upon problems of this char- 
acter ; to be undertaken early enough to be of some value in compre- 
hending, if not controlling the situation. We have seen that the 
blight might have been kept out of the country in the first place by 
inspection, or once in, that it might have been destroyed, or at least 
checked before it had gotten widely distributed. But instead it 
was permitted to enter, and to spread for many years without scien- 
tific notice, and for several more years without any organized at- 



lo 

tempt to control it, or even to study it seriously. Are we doing any 
better now with reference to the future? 

China has been shown to be the home of the chestnut blight. China, 
then, would seem to be the obvious place to study it; but no path- 
ologists are there, and state and federal parsimony has so far 
failed to provide for any investigations of the disease on its home 
ground by American pathologists. 

It has been proposed to replace the chestnut in southern New Eng- 
land by plantings of white pine, in itself the most important eastern 
timber tree; but the white pine is in turn subject to a newly im- 
ported disease, the blister rust. Tt is not certain that very serious 
and united efforts are being made to investigate and control this 
disease even in the States that introduced it. As in the case of the 
chestnut blight, scepticism has even been expressed as to its serious- 
ness. Again, it would seem that the obvious place to determine the 
seriousness of the blister rust was in Europe, its home; yet to date 
neither state nor National government has dispatched a scientist on 
this errand. In this connection it may not be amiss to call attention 
to the fact that in Pennsylvania there is, aside from the employees of 
this Commission, only one professional plant pathologist! Yet the 
preventable damage which this one plant disease — chestnut blight — 
has done, would pay for the work of more plant pathologists than are 
now at work in the entire world. 

The Commission closes its work with regret, knowing well that the 
blight will now spread over the State without hindrance. There is 
some satisfaction in knowing, however, that the work left undone 
in Pennsylvania has been actively taken up in Virginia and West 
Virginia, and that the States of Ohio and North Carolina are making 
studies preparatory to combatting the disease as soon as it appears 
in those States. The scientific research carried on by the Commis- 
sion will be continued by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. We 
may be certain that the war against this and other foreign epidemics 
will not cease until science is so far advanced in both theory and 
practice that they can be controlled. 

Very truly yours, 

WINTHROP SARGENT, 

Chairman. 



(14) 



Report of 

Hon. I. C. Williams 

Deputy Commissioner of Forestry, Collaborator 



(15) 



(M) 



'T 






'1;; -o;^ 1m' W 







A common mark of the blight. Small leaves which developed iu the early spring 
on a top recently girdled by the blight, showing midsummer condition. Withered 
leaves above the canker; sprouts below. 



A HISTOEY OF THE EAKLY PENNSYLVANIA 

EFFOET TO COMBAT THE CHESTNUT 

BAEK DISEASE. 



BY HON. I. C. WILLIAMS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF FORESTRY, 
COLLABORATOR, HARRISBURG, PA. 



Preliminary to the final report of the Chestnut Blight Commis- 
sion, it is thought desirable to make a statement detailing the his- 
tory of the chestnut bark disease in Pennsylvania so far as known, 
and of the efforts to combat it, leading up to the formation of the 
Commission under the law of 1911, and the extended work of repres- 
sion begun at that time. 

The attention of the Pennsylvania Department of Forestry was 
first attracted to the appearance of the chestnut bark disease in this 
State by a letter from Mr. Harold Peirce, of Haverford, dated July 
IS, 1908, reporting its presence in Lower Merion Township, Mont- 
gomery County, and by an article appearing in the November, 1908, 
number of "Conservation," from the pen of Dr. John Mickleborough, 
of Brooklyn. Subsequent correspondence with Dr. Mickleborough 
revealed the fact that he had been a student of the disease for over 
a year and had become familiar with it in all of its ordinary aspects. 
To these two gentlemen, therefore, the State is primarily indebted 
for the subsequent efforts made to study more particularly, and to 
attempt to control this vicious tree disease. 

The facts relating to the discovery of the disease in America and 
its identification are pretty well known. It was first detected by Dr. 
Hermann W. Merkel, in the Bronx Zoological Park, New York City, 
in 1904, although it is almost certain that it existed in that neigh- 
borhood for probably more than a year prior to Dr. Merkel's discov- 
ery. Referred for identification to Dr. W. A. Murrill of the New 
York Botanical Garden, he published a description of it in 1906*, 
and by him the fungus was named Diaporthe parasitica, so called 
because it was believed to be the only parasitic species of the genus. 
The naming of the fungus has since been corrected by means of the 
researches of Anderson, Clinton, Farlow, Shear and Stevens, and it 
is now known systematically as Endothia parasitica. 

Some controversy has been had over the origin of the disease and 
the case is probably not yet settled. Dr. Clinton's contention is and 
has been, that it is a native fungus, which, by means of weather con- 

•See "Torreya," Vol. 6, No. 9. 

(17) 



18 

ditions and possibly other factors, has taken on new attributes. Dr. 
Metcalf, his co-worker Prof. Collins, Dr. Shear, and others believed 
and still maintain that it is of foreign origin, introduced into 
America by the importation of horticultural stock. Its first known 
appearance in the region of New York City and its spread in con- 
centric zones from that point as a centre of infection, lent much 
plausibility to this theoiy. The recent discovery made by Mr. Frank 
N. Meyer, of the same fungus in northeastern China, where it is 
parasitic on Castaiiea, and where, it appears, the host trees have 
become rather highly resistant to its attack, leads further probabil- 
ity of correctness to Metcalf's theory. 

Possibly a great hope for America lies in this Chinese discovery. 
Pathologists and foresters are anxiously looking forward to the 
results of experiments now being made and which will be attempted, 
we hope, on a much larger scale in the future. The regrettable, ever- 
present fact is that this disease is with us here and now, and must 
be reckoned with from every angle of attack. There seems to be no 
present diminution suflQcient to warrant the belief that it is likely 
to wear itself out, or that our trees will become sufficiently resistant 
to ward off the attack prior to the destruction of the trees them- 
selves. 

Subsequent correspondence between Dr. Mickleborough and the 
Department of Forestry culminated in a letter from him under date 
of March 9, 1909, in which he outlined a definite plan for the exami- 
nation of a supposedly infected territory in southeastern Pennsyl- 
vania, and offered his services to the Commonwealth for carrying 
out plans of investigation. The proposed inspection was approved 
by the Department on March 17, 1909, and the services of Dr. Mickle- 
borough thus enlisted. The first inspection visit was made by him 
in company with the writer, March 29, 1909, at Mt. Holly, in Cum- 
berland county, but where no evidence of the disease was found at 
that time. 

Prior to the beginning of this work in 1909, Dr. Mickleborough 
had been invited by Dr. Jane Baker, physician in charge of the 
Chester County Insane Hospital, to speak before an educational con- 
ference at Embreeville, Chester county. At this time the disease 
was not generally prevalent in that region, but a number of infected 
chestnut trees were found. 

The work of inspection over the southeastern portion of the State 
thus undertaken under the direction of the Department of Forestry, 
as stated above, was conducted by Dr. Mickleborough, and carried 
through or into almost every countj^ east of tlie Susquehanna. Dur- 
ing the progress of this examination the chestnut blight was not 
found north and west of the South Mountain, although prior to this 
time the United States Department of Agriculture had reported the 



19 

existence of two spot infections in the western portion of the State, 
near Altoona, and a reexamination of the material relating thereto 
by Dr. Metcalf and his assistants, seemed to leave no doubt as to 
the correctness of this report. Certain it is that in May, 1909, there 
was no large or extended infection west of the Susquehanna.' Had 
there been in existence at that time ik& means to carry on work of 
control along both sides of the Susquehanna Eiver, who can tell 
what the result might have been, looked at in the light of our present 
knowledge ? 

The report of Dr. Mickleborough's inspection and study was pub- 
lished by the Department in the autumn of 1909. This is a 16-page 
pamphlet illustrated by drawings showing a portion of the structural 
formation of the fungus, and by a Lumiere color photograph of a 
stem section of chestnut covered externally by the fruiting funons 
This specimen of infected chestnut wood was sent in from Pike 
county, in the upper Delaware valley, and was incubated and de- 
veloped in a moist cell in the Department of Forestry durino- the 
summer of 1909. " 

In the early part of the study of this bark disease, it was believed 
that the Japanese species of Castanea was either immune or highly 
resistant to attack. Several specimens of Japanese chestnut were 
under observation on Long Island, and fairly gave rise to this belief 
One grove examined near Westbury, in June, 1909, showed the 
Paragons and common chestnuts badly attacked. The Japanese 
showed no attack at all. 

Through the courtesy of the Hicks nursery at Westbury, forty- 
five young chestnut trees supposed to be Japanese, and one hundred 
grafting scions were sent to the chestnut orchard of Mr Levi Wise 
at Gap, Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, and distributed among four 
persons of the neighborhood for planting and testing out for im- 
munity. The bark disease was at that time particularly prevalent in 
the chestnut woods at this place. Some of the newly planted trees 
died from other causes, but enough of them were attacked and killed 
by the blight to show that these particular trees, at least, were not 
immune. 

On the 29th day of March, 1910, Dr. Mickleborough delivered a 
lecture on the subject of this tree disease before the Main Line 
Citizens' Association at the Merion Cricket Club, Haverford Pa 
This meeting was arranged largely through the efforts of Mr Peirce" 
who at that time was the owner of several acres of chestnut wood- 
land, and of which tract Dr. Mickleborough made a rather extended 
examination, finding the chestnut blight present in a number of trees 
This discovery and the lecture delivered on the subject brought the 
matter prominently to the attention of the citizens of that neigh- 



20 

borhood, and later led to some very important developments with 
respect to studying and combating the disease. 

Following this address by Dr. Mickleborough, Mr. Peirce was in 
correspondence with the Department of Forestry, calling attention 
to the inroads being made upon the chestnut trees by this disease in 
the neighborhood of his residence, requesting the Department to 
render such help as it might be able in assisting the people to under- 
stand the situation better, and, if possible, to eliminate or at least 
attempt to control the trouble. This correspondence culminated in 
the calling of a meeting on May 23, 191 0, at the house of Mr. Robert 
W. Lesley, at Haverford, which was attended by a number of the 
residents and land owners of the neighborhood, by Dr. John W. 
Harshberger, the botanist, representing the University of Pennsyl- 
vania, and by the Deputy Commissioner, representing the Pennsyl- 
vania Department of Forestry. 

The preliminary arrangements for beginning an extensive survey 
of this region were discussed at this meeting. The Department rep- 
resentative made his report to the Forestry Commission at its meet- 
ing held on June 3, 1910. On motion of Dr. Rothrock, the Commis- 
sion directed that the Department render the desired help, and on 
the same day a letter to this effect was sent to Mr. Peirce, the sec- 
retary of the citizens' meeting. On September 1, 1910, a corps of 
inspectors from the Department in charge of the Deputy Commis- 
sioner, arrived at Haverford and Ardmore, prepared to begin their 
work. Oi3Qces were speedily fitted up in the building of the Merion 
Title and Trust Company at Ardmore, and the first inspection of 
trees was made on the property of Mr. Lesley on Saturday, Septem- 
ber 3rd. From this date forward until December 19, 1910, the work 
was vigorously carried on, and a close inspection made of 296 prop- 
erties, covering most of the region extending from Overbrook to 
Paoli, and from the Schuylkill River on the north, to a considerable 
distance south of the Pennsylvania Railroad. A draft of each prop- 
erty was prepared showing the location of all chestnut trees and in- 
dicating those which at that time were apparently free of disease, as 
well as those showing the infection. Each property owner was then 
furnished with a copy of the report and draft relating to his own 
land. 

To show the interest taken in this work by members of the Main 
Line Citizens' Association, it is necessary only to state that the 
work was carried on almost entirely at the expense of the associa- 
tion. The individual conti-ibutions for the purpose amounted to 
$2,707.70. 

During the progress of this inspection, a second public meeting 
was held in the auditorium of the Merion Cricket Club, at which 



21 

time a preliminary report was submitted and discussion had with 
respect to the situation as it then existed. This meeting was at- 
tended by a large number of ladies and gentlemen, members of the 
association, and much interest was shown in the progress reported. 
The final report of the committee of the association having the work 
in charge was printed and rendered to the members under date of 
May 8, 1912. This committee was as follows: Messrs. Harold 
Peirce, Chairman; Theodore N. Ely, Allan Evans, Edgar C. Felton, 
William Righter Fisher, Alba B. Johnson, and Robert W. Lesley. 

In a letter bearing date the 12th day of March, 1909, addressed to 
the Commissioner of Forestry at Harrisburg, Dr. Mickleborough 
used this language. "As to remedy, the best that can be suggested 
by anyone at present is Control and not Extermination, for various 
reasons. This I think is also true of the San Jose scale." It will 
thus be seen that the original idea involved in the attack on the 
chestnut blight in Pennsylvania was control, just as the Department 
of Agriculture of this State has always aimed at control of the San 
Jose scale, suggested in the letter just quoted. After the pre- 
liminary studies were completed, no one believed that extermina- 
tion or eradication could be accomplished with the means at hand; 
but it was thought then, and is still the belief of those who are most 
closely associated with the work, that a control is possible, and that 
it was much more possible then than now, after the lapse of a period 
of five years. 

During the progress of the inspection along the Main Line, it be- 
came apparent that more than a local effort was demanded if any sub- 
stantial progress were to be made towards preventing the spread of 
the disease. Steps were taken to enlist the active interest of the Gov- 
ernor and the Legislature, (then in session). On the evening of 
April 10, 1911, Governor Tener sent a special message to both 
houses of the Legislature, calling direct attention to the situation, 
and asking tlie help of the General Assembly to combat the disease. 
The Governor's message was as follows: 

"Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 

"Executive Chamber, 
"Earrishurg, April 10, 1911. 
"Gentlemen of the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania: 
"I have the honor to call your attention to a new and virulent 
disease of the wild chestnut tree, commonly known as chestnut 
Might, recently discovered near New York City, and hitherto un- 
known in America. The disease has continued to spread, destroying 
the chestnut trees in the neighborhood of New York City and well 
up the Hudson. It has invaded Long Island, beginning at the west- 
ern end, sweeping eastward, practically covering the island. It has 



22. 

progressed to tlie southwest, through the whole of the State of New 
•Jersey, and all the chestnut trees there appear to be doomed to de- 
struction. It has entered Pennsylvania and is prevalent in the 
Delaware Valley. It has been discovered in the following counties: 
Pike, Monroe, Northampton, Bucks, Montgomery, Chester, Phila- 
delphia, Delaware, Lancaster, and soutliern Berks. In isolated places 
it has crossed the Susquehanna, and is now detected in eastern York, 
eastern Perry and one portion of southwestern Perry. Other points 
of infection have been found near Altoona and Greensburg. 

"Experiments made by the Department of Agriculture at Wash- 
ington demonstrate that it is possible to prevent the spread of the 
disease by removing spot appearances as they are detected, and de 
stroying the trees in which tlie disease occurs. By this means tht 
region around Washington has been freed from the blight for at 
least tv\^o years, and it has not re-invaded this area. In the south- 
eastern portion of Pennsylvania, where the infection is severe and 
almost complete, little hope exists for saving the trees, but in that 
portion of the State west of the Susquehanna and north of the Blue 
Mountains, it is hoped, by prompt action on the part of the State, to 
prevent further damage. If this disease can be held within the 
southeastern portion of the State, it will mean the saving of the 
wild chestnut trees in the other parts of the Commonwealth, the 
value of which extends into the millions of dollars. 

"I therefore recommend that the Legislature give immediate at- 
tention to this important subject and that a Commission be created 
with sufficient power and appropriation of moneys to determine 
upon and employ efficient and practical means for the prevention, 
control, and eradication of this disease, and that said Commission 
be authorized, in conjunction with the Department of Forestry, or 
otherwise, to conduct scientific investigations into the nature and 
causes of such disease and to adopt such means to prevent its intro- 
duction and spread as may be found necessary. • 

"JOHN K. TENER." 

The next day, April 11, 1911, a bill having this purpose in view, 
and which had been previously carefully drawn and vigorously 
criticised, was simultaneously introduced in both House and Sen- 
ate. This bill became a law by the signature of the Governor, June 
14, 1911*. The law creates a Commission of five members and vests 
them with almost plenaiy power to carry out its mandates. An 
appropriation of |275,000 became available at once. The appoint- 
ment of the members of the Commission followed after an interval 
of about two weeks. Organization was effected, ofiicers and assist- 
ants chosen, and on August 23, 1911, the Commission was prepared 
to proceed with its work. 

While the major eft'ort of the Commission from the beginning 
was to get a control, the subject of eradication was vigorously de- 
bated, and, as will be seen in subsequent pages, determined efl'orts 
at eradication were undertaken under the advice and direction of 



•See Pamphlet Laws, 19U, page 922. 



23 

the Commission. The feeling was that if there be any merit in 
such effort, opportunity ought not to be lacking to prove it. The 
early announced and decisive plan involving the cutting-out method, 
proposed and outlined by Dr. Murrill, contributed very consider- 
ably toward the decision to try out this method. 

The Murrill plan (§) was as follows: 

"Owners of standing chestnut timber within the affected area are 
advised to cut and use all trees, both old and young, that stand 
within half a mile of diseased trees, unless protected from infection 
through wind-blown spores by dense forest growth or some other 
natural barrier. This may not prevent the spread of the disease 
through the agency of storms, birds and squirrels, but it will at 
least retard its progress. Old weathered chestnut trunks that have 
been dead several years have no power to spread the disease, and 
these may be cut at leisure for the tannic acid factory or for fire- 
wood. Trees of good size recently killed should be turned into lum- 
ber as soon as possible; the fungus affects only the bark, but other 
fungi may afterwards impair the value of the wood if allowed to 
stand too long. Discarded branches and young trees of no value that 
are cut near the edge of the infected area should be burned at once 
in order to destroy the spores they contain; but if they are well 
within the zone of infection, such precaution is useless." 

Every element in the Murrill plan has been employed both by the 
Commission and by the State Department of Forestry. The fact 
that subsequently Dr. Murrill partially shifted his ground*, did not 
seem suflScient reason to warrant the abandonment of a plan of at- 
tack which in many cases was productive of satisfactory results. 

The history of what work the Commission did, and of the results 
accomplished form the substance of several preliminary reports sub- 
mitted to the Governor from time to time. The final report is what 
follows. 



§W. A. Murrill: Journal of the New York Botanical Garden, Vol. 9, No. 98, p. 30. February, 
•Harrisburg Conference Report, 1912, pp. 194, 21)1, 202. 




r^^ 



(24) 



Report of 

Mark A. Carleton 

General Manager Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree 
Blight Commission 



(25) 



^^ 



I -26 ) 




Summer condition of a blighted tree. The withered leaves of the top above the 
canker, and the vigorous sprouts below the canker are characteristic signs. 



THE FIGHT TO SAVE THE CHESTNUT TEEES ; 
FINAL EEPOET OF THE GENEEAL MANAOEE. 



By MARK A. CARLETON, GENERAL MANAGER, 
PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION. 



In closing the active work of tliis Commission, it is a great sat- 
isfaction to be able to report constant progress- to date, and the at- 
tainment of good, practical results. The work began two years ago 
in the midst of much skepticism as to its possibilities, but the op- 
timism of the Commission and the wisdom of its methods of opera- 
tion have in the main, been amply confirmed by the results since 
obtained. 

PROGRESS OF FIELD WORK. 

A more or less definite division has been maintained between the 
slightly infected Western portion of the State and the badly infected 
Eastern portion, known respectively as the Western and Eastern 
districts. In a previous report it was stated that in the Western part 
of the State the blight had been eradicated to the extent covering 
nearly one-half of the area of the State. This area so far as is 
known to date has been maintained free from the disease. In a few 
cases new infections were found which have been removed. It is 
important to note in this connection not only the fact tjiat the 
progress of the disease has been checked in Western Pennsylvania, 
but that we have without much doubt prevented the blight from 
gaining a foothold in Ohio, and nearby portions of New York and 
West Virginia. 

In the Eastern District since January first of this year, the field 
work has developed almost entirely into a campaign of utilization, 
no rigid sanitation work having been conducted except for the pro- 
tection of chestnut orchards and nurseries. 



EFFECTIVENESS OP THE CUTTING-OUT METHOD. 

In the two years work no facts have yet been obtained which 
would indicate the advisability of any change in our present method 
of "cutting out" diseased trees and thorough cleaning of the stumps 
for the eradication of the disease. A number of tracts where the 
disease has been eradicated by Commission employees have agaiji 
been inspected recently, giving results, which are in the main, favor- 
able. Of course, improvements have been made as to details all 

(27) 



28 

along. It is not a pleasant prospect to consider the serious results 
likely to follow after this method of eradicating the disease, con- 
ducted by the Commission, is obliged to cease. 

BENEFICIAL INSECTS. 

It will be of interest to quote here the words of the Forest En- 
tomologist, of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, in his comment 
on a widely disseminated press notice of that Department, Novem- 
ber 22nd, 1912, apparently based on the work of F. C. Craighead. 

"The beneficial work of these insects can, however, be greatly 
encouraged if the owners of tlie timber will dispose of the diseased 
trees in the principal centers of infection, as recommended by the 
Chestnut Blight Commission of Pennsylvania, and other State and 
Federal officials. Thus, if the large majority of the infection is 
disposed of, the beneficial insects will concentrate on the remaining 
scattering and isolated infections, and thus more completely destroy 
the fruiting bodies and contribute to the protection of the remain- 
ing Uving trees. In fact, it is a question of the owner securing the 
greatest benefit from the natural agencies of control by doing his 
share of the work." 

NURSERY INSPECTION. 

The inspection of nursery stock has been made even more rigid 
than before. Not only has it been required that every individual 
tree should be inspected by a competent employee of this Commis- 
sion, but in shipping it has been required also that every individual 
tree' should be tagged. A copy of the revised regulations governing 
the inspection and shipment of nursery stock is appended to this 
report, which shows the form of tags required to be attached both to 
individual trees and to bundles of trees. The fact that several of 
the most serious infections in the State have been caused heretofore 
by the planting of diseased nursery stock in new localities is suf- 
ficient reason for so rigid an inspection. 

DISCOVERY OF THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT IN CHINA. 

It has recently been proved by authentic specimens and artificial 
cultures of the material transmitted by the Explorer of the U. S. 
Department of Agriculture, that the chestnut blight exists in East- 
ern China.* This fact makes it all the more probable that the be- 
ginning of the disease in this country may ha ve come about by the 

♦Science, Vol. 36, ?«:o. 937, p. 825, Dee. 13, 1912. 




Winter condition of a cliestnut tree with a blight-girdled top. 



29 

introduction of such diseased stock from China or Japan. That 
new centers of infection are often started by the introduction of 
diseased nursery stock, is a common observation. 



PROTECTION OF ORCHARDS AND NURSERIES. 

It has been the policy of the Commission for sometime to protect 
orchards and nurseries from outside infection in all cases where the 
owners have expressed a desire for such protection, and have them- 
selves taken care to control the disease as much as possible. This 
work has been successful much beyond our expectations. The largest 
and most important orchards thus protected are located at 
Sunbury, Paxinos, and Berwick. The owners of neighboring forest 
tracts have been required to remove all diseased chestnut trees 
within one-half mile of the nearest point of the orchard in each case. 
An interesting result in one of the most important of these cases is 
the. fact that these owners have been able to sell the products of 
their diseased trees for an amount considerably above the entire 
cost of removal, sanitation work, etc. 



PREVENTION OR REMEDY. 

At this writing no specific remedy has been found for the disease. 
However, later information confirms the statements previously pub- 
lished that the disease may be largely prevented from entering 
healthy trees by contant and regular spraying with Bordeaux Mix- 
ture made up in proportions of 5 pounds of lime, 5 pounds of copper 
sulphate, and 50 gallons of water. The application of this mixture 
simply prevents any new germination of spores, but has no effect 
whatever, in cases where the disease has already started in the 
tree. Because of the cost, it is, of course, not applicable in forests. 



CONTROL OF THE DISEASE IN ORCHARDS. 

By cutting out the cankers and coating with antiseptic solutions 
and water proofing afterwards, the blight can be fairly well con- 
trolled in chestnut orchards and in certain valuable lawn or park 
trees. In connection with this treatment a spray of the Bordeaux 
Mixture as above noted should be used occasionally. Excellent re- 
sults along this line of experiment are shown in a large orchard at 
Paxinos, and in several of the public parks of the State. 



30 



FAKE TEEATMENTS, THEORIES OR CAUSES, ETC. 

As often happens in the case of a public campaign against a 
serious epidemic, we have been constantly besieged by the gratui- 
tous offers of various and sundry remedies for the blight, which in- 
clude applications of fertilizers to the soil, insertions of flowers of 
sulphur and other compounds in holes bored in the trees, applica- 
tions of coatings of different chemicals to the body of the tree, and 
numerous other treatments, all of which we believed in the beginning 
to have no value. However, all parties having theories to advance 
or remedies to propose have been given a chance to prove their claims 
by experimenting on trees controlled by the Commission for such 
purposes at Emilie, Bucks county. A number of parties have taken 
advantage of the opportunity. Recently, an examination was made of 
the various treatments by a competent Board of Reviewers, whose con- 
clusion was that not one of the treatments tried had any deterrent 
effect upon the chestnut blight. 

Many of the persons above mentioned were apparently sincere in 
the claims they made, and were simply ignorant of the true cause 
of the disease. Instances have come to our attention, however, of 
parties practicing certain methods of treatment and charging for the 
same, who are plainly impostors. Employees of the Commission 
have no doubt benefited many people by exposing the methods of 
these impostors. 

EXAMINATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL TREES. 

Excellent opportunities have been afforded the tree surgeon of 
the Commission and his assistants to counteract the influence of 
false theories and worthless remedies such as above mentioned, in 
responding to the numerous requests for the examination of indi- 
vidual trees. These requests have continued to come to the Commis- 
sion headquarters right up to the time of closing our work. No 
other line of work has been so effective in arousing the personal in- 
terests of the people. No request from any part of the State has 
been ignored. In this connection much incidental advice has been 
given to property owners as to the general handling of lawns and 
orchards, and the management of small woodlots. 

PUBLIC PARKS AND FARMS. 

In co-operation with the oificials of Wildwood Park, at Harris- 
burg, the Commission has completely eradicated the blight from that 
Park, about 150 diseased chestnut trees having been removed or 



31 

treated out of a total of 1,290 trees. Here in a few cases the peeled 
stumps were creosoted to show that method of sanitation. Consid- 
erable help has also been given to the management of Fairmount 
Park. Arrangements have also been made for the entire removal 
of blighted chestnut trees from the State Live Stock Board's Farm, 
in Delaware County. In the event of the continuation of our work, 
it was also planned to eradicate the blight thoroughly from the Valley 
Forge Park grounds. 

BLTGHT-EATING BEETLES. 

It has been announced by the Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Depart- 
ment of Agriculture, that several species of beetles have been found 
eating the spores of the blight fungus, and it is stated that "should 
these insects prove as beneficial as the observations indicate, they 
are certain to be an important factor in tlie natural control of the 
dreaded chestnut blight disease." It is worthy of note in this con- 
nection that the insect investigations of this Commission have shown 
that a number of insects also carry large quantities of blight spores, 
and may thus indirectly assist in the dissemination of the blight. 
One of these insects which was found to carry an enormous number of 
spores is one of the beetles above mentioned as eating the fungus. 

CORDWOOD AND THE SPECIAL TARIFF. 

Since writing the last report, there has been a considerable ship- 
ment of chestnut cordwood, shippers taking advantage of the special 
tariff issued by the Pennsylvania Railroad. At last accounts the 
prospects were that there would be much business in this line right 
along in the future, being encouraged by the special low rates. 

PROMPTNESS IN UTILIZING CHESTNUT. 

Observations made by Commission employees in company with com- 
mercial lumbermen have shown that already in certain localities, dis- 
eased chestnut has been dead so long that deterioration is beginning. 
We have, therefore, made it plain to owners of such chestnut and have 
advertised the fact as much as possible, that promptness is necessary 
in getting rid of the diseased trees, if the owners wish to obtain the 
most value possible from the trees. 

INTENSIVE LOCAL UTILIZATION. 

Our most difficult line of work has been that of utilization. Facts 
as to the conditions could easily be obtained, but the difficulty has 
been in bringing the buyer and seller together. Recently a plan was 
3 



32 

adopted, which if we would be able to continue its operation, would 
without question, hasten very rapidly the utilization work. This 
plan, the details of which are given elsewhere, is to canvass particular 
localities thoroughly, finding out just what can be offered in the way 
of different chestnut products, ascertaining the local market for 
the same, and then determining so far as possible, where else the 
surplus may be marketed. Tn connection with the carrying out of 
this plan, up to this writing as many as a dozen portable saw mills 
have been located in one county, and in other localities many prac- 
tical operations had already been started, thus tending to rapid 
and clean cut work in utilizing blighted chestnut. 

RESISTANCE AND IMMUNITY. 

The discovery of the chestnut blight in China makes it now all 
the more probable that resistant chestnut stocks may be obtained 
in that country. It was, therefore, a wise movement last fall when 
we took advantage of the opportunity to obtain a considerable 
amount of seed of what is probably the most important chestnut 
in Eastern China. A large quantity of the nuts were planted at 
Paxinos, and the seedlings at this date which are from six to 
fifteen inches high, are looking well. From the nuts sent also to 
the State Forest Nursery at Greenwood, 75 seedlings are 
at present growing, and from those sent to Asaph, Pa., there are 
now 182 plants, averaging ten inches in height. All of these seed- 
lings will be of much value in cross-breeding and other ways in the 
important future work of developing blight resistant orchard trees. 
In this connection it should be noted that in a recent bulletin is- 
sued from the Arnold Arboretum a considerable discussion is given 
of the possibilities in developing blight resistant chestnut trees 
from Chinese introductions, a number of the latter now being grown 
at the Arboretum. The two mentioned as the most important in- 
clude the one of which we now have seedlings. So far these Chinese 
chestnuts grown at the Arboretum have not become blighted. 

According to the Kew Index, there are seven species of chestnut 
and twenty-one of the chinquapin in the world. From all these 
species there should be many other chances of obtaining blight 
resistant trees that may be used in breeding and making our own 
stock better. 

CHESTNUT BLIGHT EXHIBITS. 

Several exhibits of specimens showing the work of this Commis- 
sion have been placed in public institutions which will remain as 
monuments of our work. An excellent exhibit has been placed at 



83 

the Caruegie Museum at Pittsburgh. Another has been finally 
completed in the State Museum at Harrisburg, and a third one at 
the Commercial Museiim in Philadelphia is not yet finished, but 
has been planned on rather a large scale. It was contemplated 
also to place another exhibit in the Everhart Museum at Scranton, 
which may yet be done. An excellent exhibition of specimens and 
illustrations of our work was made in connection with the State 
Forestry Exhibition at Horticultural Hall, Philadelphia, in May. 

PUBLICATIONS. 

When this final manuscript is published, there will have been is- 
sued the following publications of this Commission: 

Report of The Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference. (Un- 
numbered). 

Bulletin No. 1 — The Chestnut Blight Disease. 

Bulletin No. 2 — Treatment of Ornamental Chestnut Trees Af- 
fected with the Blight Disease. 

Eeport of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, 
July 1st to December 31st, 1912. (Unnumbered). 

Bulletin No. 3— Field Studies in Blight. 

Bulletin No. 4 — Chestnut Blight Fungus and a Related Sapro- 
phyte. 

Bulletin No. 5 — The Symptoms of Chestnut Tree Blight and a 
Brief Description of the Blight Fungus. 

Bulletin No. 6 — The Chestnut Tree. Methods and Specifications 
for the Utilization of Blighted Chestnut. 

Bulletin No. 7 — Morphology and Life History of the Chestnut 
Blight Fungus. 

Final Report of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Numerous 
descriptive and educational circulars, charts, etc. 

CO-OPERATION. 

Very effective co-operation has continued to be maintained with 
the Office of Forest Pathology, of the U. S. Bureau of Plant In- 
dustry. Recently the salaries of all pathologists connected with 
the Commission have been carried by that office, and there has been 
constant communication and co-operation in reference to all re- 
search work. 

Much excellent help has continually been given by the State For- 
estry Department at Harrisburg, the Deputy Commissioner, Hon. I. 
C. Williams, being assigned as a collaborator with this Commission. 

The authorities of the University of Pennsylvania have been ex- 
ceedingly courteous in granting ample space for laboratory work 



34 

in the new Zoology Building. Eoom has also been given for labora- 
tory work in tree medication in the Botanical Building. Franklin 
and Marshall College, at Lancaster, and the State College of Penn- 
sylvania, have also provided room for laboratory work in the field 
investigations. 

There has been a liberal interchange of ideas and helpful sug- 
gestions through correspondence with the State Conservation Com- 
mission at Albany, N. Y., the State Forester and State Pathologist 
of New Jersey, the State Forester of Maryland and of Massachusetts, 
and with ofScials in Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland. 



MUCH IMPORTANT WORK UNFINISHED. 

The cessation of the work at this time is particularly unfortunate 
because so many important investigations, not yet finished, 
would likely have had a very practical and beneficial bearing upon 
the actual eradication of the disease. 

First. — Very little is known about the bast miner — the insect 
which, as stated in another place, is probably one of the most im- 
portant carriers of blight spores. A full knowledge of the life 
history of this insect would probably very soon have been com- 
pleted, and which would be a most interesting contribution to sci- 
ence*. 

Second. — The Chemist and Physiologist in tree medication had 
planned to use a new solution for injection into diseased trees, 
which according to chemical work already done, promises to check 
the growth of the blight. 

Third. — The local intensive work in utilization had just begun, 
and as stated elsewhere, bids fair to solve largely the difficult 
problem of utilizing rapidly the diseased chestnut. 

Fourth. — The discovery of the blight in China and the posses- 
sion by the Commission of a large number of seedlings of one of 
the most important Chinese chestnuts, as well as immune and re- 
sistant Japanese stock, opens a field for breeding experiments 
which would without question have been of the greatest benefit to 
the owners of chestnut orchards. 

Fifth. — Although not demonstrated before, it is now proved that 
birds and insects carry enormous quantities of spores of the blight 
fungus, which necessarily changes our viewpoint considerably with 
respect to the eradication of the disease. 

Sixth. — In a number of forest tracts and several orchards, thor- 
ough "cutting-out" work and up-to-date surgery treatments have 



♦Since writing tlie above, this worlt has already been finished, as stated in footnote on page 46. 



35 

been started by expert employees of the Commission, whicli are 
just now beginning to sliow evidences of the value of this kind 
of work. 

Brief statements of the results of the different lines of work con- 
ducted by the Commission follow, credited to the respective parties 
in charge. 

FIELD OPERATIONS. 

As heretofore, all field work has been conducted under the im- 
mediate direction of the General Superintendent, Mr. S. B. Det- 
wiler. In the following statements some of the principal features 
of the work to date are pointed out by him, and also suggestions 
given to timber owners who may wish to clear their woods of blight 
on their own responsibility. A statement in detail of the effective- 
ness of sanitation cutting in controlling the blight, by Mr. Detwiler, is 
appended to this report. 



REDUCTION OF FORCE. 

f 

A majority of the field agents of the Commission were dismissed 
in January, 1913, because it was believed that very little work 
could be done during the inclement months of winter and spring. 
However, the unusually open winter made it possible for the small 
field force retained to accomplish more for the time and money ex- 
pended than at any previous time since our work was organized. An 
average force of 36 men in the western district and 11 men in the 
eastern district were in the field from the first of the year to July 
25th, 1913, when all field work was discontinued. 



BETTER WORK IN WINTER. 

The experience of the past two years has demonstrated that more 
can be accomplished in locating and destroying the blight after the 
leaves have fallen than while the trees are in full foliage. Girdled 
twigs and branches bearing withered leaves are prominent at great 
distances in winter, and the increased amount of light admitted 
through the tops of the trees makes it easier to see cankers on the 
trunks and branches. The proper treatment of the infected trees 
is no more difficult in winter than in late summer or fall, unless 
the snow is very deep. In the badly blighted region in the eastern 
part of the State, field men are able to accomplish better results 
because most timber owners prefer to cut their timber in the win 
ter, when they can spare the time from their farming operations. 



36 



FIELD WORK IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT. 

Thorough scouting in 1912 has shown that no blight exists west 
of a line drawn through central Somerset and Cambria counties, 
along the extreme eastern border of Cameron County, to the north- 
east corner of Tioga County. West of this line, nine isolated spot 
infections were found in six counties, but all of these infections 
were eradicated as soon as found, and have been under careful sur- 
veillance since. These infected spots were located in Fayette, Elk, 
Warren, Potter, Clarion and Indiana counties, and five out of the 
nine spots were found to be due to the planting of diseased nursery 
stock purchased from nurseries in the infected region. In April, 
1913, the infection in Indiana County was discovered in a shipment 
of three chestnut trees purchased from a nursery in New Jersey. 
These examples show very strikingly the ease with which the blight 
is widely distributed through the shipment of nursery stock. Per- 
sons who have planted nursery grown chestnut trees in regions free 
from the blight, should watch these trees carefully for the first ap- 
pearance of the disease, and promptly destroy all infected trees. 

Field work in the Western District during the period covered by 
this report has been confined to Tioga, Clinton, Lycoming, Centre, 
Huntingdon, Blair, Bedford, and Somerset counties. Tioga, Clin- 
ton, Centre, and Blair counties have been scouted and most of the 
diseased trees removed, but a considerable amount of infection still 
remains in Lycoming, Huntingdon, Bedford, and Somerset counties. 
In addition, Fiilton and MiflSin counties still have a large amount 
of infection remaining, since with the small field force it was im- 
possible to continue the work in these counties. 

The accompanying map shows the progress of the control work 
in the Western District, and the location of infected areas. The 
following tabulation is a statement of the number of infected trees 
found and cut out in the Western District from the time the work 
was begun until July 1st, 1913: 



S-^S- 



^ ,-l.<^ 




37 



STATEMENT OF CHESTNUT BLIGHT INFECTION IN THE 
WESTERN DISTRICT. 



^•d 



O o 

is 



t-. > 

QJ O 

a 0) 



Allegheny, ... 
Armstrong, ... 

Bedford 

Bradford 

Blair, 

Beaver 

Butler, 

Cameron, 

Centre* 

Clinton 

Clearfield, — 

Clarion, 

Cambria, 

Crawford, — 

Elk 

Erie, 

Fayette 

fulton, 

Forest, 

Greene, 

Huntingdon, . 
Indiana, — 

Jefferson, 

Lycoming, — 

Lawrence 

Mifflin, 

McKean, 

Mercer, 

Potter, 

Somerset, 

Sullivan 

Tioga, — »... 

Venango, 

Westmoreland, 
"Washington, . 
AVarren, 

Total , . 



147 
91 



142 
ie9 



233 
1 



250 
"*95 



4,027 
1,048 
1,884 



!,556 
r,4Sl 

117 
1 

450 



377 


11 

1,902 




5,287 
1 


5,015 


1,97S 




1 

9,119 

2W7 

43 







16 
37,510 



2,787 

829 

1,680 



1,763 
2,704 

117 
1 

430 



377 



11 
900 



4,771 

1 



4,486 
'i|468 



207 
43 



38 



A HAEMLESS SAPROPHYTE. 

Persons familiar with the appearance of the chestnut blight 
fungus may easily confuse it with another fungus found in Wash- 
ington, Greene, and Fayette counties. This fungus ( Endothia 
radicalis Schw.), (Denot.) is related to the blight fungus (Endothia 
parasitica (Murr.) (And.), but is found only on dead wood and bark 
and does not attack living tissues. It has been thoroughly studied 
by the field pathologist, since at first it was feared that it might 
have parasitic tendencies. Continued investigation proves beyond 
doubt that this fungus is a harmless saprophyte which need not be 
feared. It need not be confused with the parasitic species by those 
who have the opportunity to compare them. 

FIELD WORK IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT. 

Field work in the Eastern District has been conducted mainly 
on the plan outlined in the previous report. Inspections were made 
on the request of timber owners and advice given as to the best 
method of procedure in each case. Particular attention was given 
to assisting owners of blighted chestnut in finding the best markets 
tor the products. On the request of owners desiring to take ad- 
vantage of the reduced freight rates on blighted chestnut cordwood, 
inspections were made and necessary certificates issued. Super- 
vision of enforced cutting of all blighted chestmit trees within a 
half mile of chestnut orchards in which the owners are endeavoring 
to keep the disease under control, was continued. 

As the evidences of the blight become more noticeable and the 
seriousness of the situation forces attention, owners of chestnut 
timber in eastern Pennsylvania have shown an increasing interest 
in the work of controlling the blight, and more requests for assist- 
ance were received than could be given individual attention. For 
the guidance of owners who wished to clean their woods of blight, 
either by doing the work themselves or having it done by contract, 
the following suggestions were made by the Office of Utilization. 
These suggestions are for use in eastern Pennsylvania only, where 
the blight is general. 

SUGGESTIONS FOR TIMBER OWNERS. 

1. It is always advisable in cutting blighted chestnut to clean up 
the ground thoroughly and burn all infected material, for the sake 
of the future crop and the community as a whole. Even if financial 
reasons make it impossible to treat the stumps properly, the brush 



39 

and refuse should be burned, and all merchantable material re- 
moved from the tract within a reasonable period. Where the per- 
centage of blight is very high, it is advisable to cut all the chestnut 
trees rather than attempt to remove only the diseased trees. 

2. Stumps should not be cut higher than the diameter of the 
tree, but this may be impracticable in sprout growth timber. A low 
stump saves the best end of the log, and causes the succeeding 
generation of sprouts to be firmly rooted. 

3. Where practicable, all timber should be peeled. Poles, ties, 
posts and rails, should be skidded to one or more convenient places. 
The bark and chips collected at these points should be burned, since 
this refuse is very frequently the breeding place of the blight 
fungus. 

4. It is advisable to remove all bark from the stumps down to 
the mineral soil, to prevent the further spread of the disease by its 
growth on this bark. Unpeeled stumps, even if free from blight at 
the time the tree is felled, are very apt to become infected, and the 
disease will then eventually destroy the sprouts at the base. Stumps 
of trees cut in winter while the bark is "tight" may be left until 
spring, and peeled when the sap is ascending. Stumps made in sum- 
mer should be peeled at once. 

5. All chestnut refuse, including the brush from the tops, bark 
from stumps, chips, etc., should be collected and burned at as early 
a time as may be done with safety from fire. Green tops of trees 
felled in summer can be burned immediately by close piling over 
a well-started fire. The danger of infecting the sprouts from the 
stump is lessened if the fire be made over the stump after peeling. 
Stumps can be more cheaply sterilized, however, by painting them 
with creosote, and creosote also appears to be absolutely effective in 
keeping the stump free from infection, whereas a fire seldom chars 
the base of the stump sufficiently. 

6. Woodsmen, while cutting and removing chestnut, should do 
as little injury as possible to the remaining trees, whether large or 
small. When the work is done by contract, trees carelessly broken 
-in felling chestnut should be paid for at their market value. Mer- 
chantable chestnut left in the woods, either cut or uncut, when con- 
tracts call for the removal of all of the same, should be paid for at 
its market value. 

7. Great care should be exercised in burning material so as not 
to injure other trees, or allow fires to remain unwatched in the 
woods. Forest fires may result, causing much damage. Burning 
should not be done when the woods are very dry, or a high wind is 
blowing. 



40 



LOCAL INTENSIVE FIELD WORK. 

Early in the spring a more extensive plan of field work in tlie 
southeastern portion of the State was adopted. A locality was se- 
lected where the blight is beyond control, and immediate utilization 
necessary to avoid serious financial loss. The boundaries of the 
area selected were so made that the timber in all of the woodlots in 
the area could be handled in much the same way as though the 
woodlots comprised a single tract. A map showing the exact loca- 
tion of all of the woodlots was made, and a field agent detailed to 
estimate merchantable chestnut in the form of saw logs, poles, ties, 
posts and cordwood in each woodlot. The local market for these 
products was then ascertained, to determine whether all timber on 
the area could be best sold locally on in outside markets. At the 
same time the field agent interested the owners of the woodlots in 
the prompt removal and utilization of their chestnut trees before 
greater loss was occasioned by the blight. Usually the owner of a 
considerable quantity of blighted trees is anxious to follow this 
course, but the scarcity of competent woodsmen makes it diflScult 
or impossible. In such cases, the Office of Utilization presented the 
data obtained by the field agent to operators of portable saw mills, 
stave mills, pole or tie cutters, as the facts warranted, and as many 
buyers as possible were interested in locating on the area. So far 
as there was time to test this plan, it appears that this is the cheap- 
est and most efl'ective way of getting results in the eastern district, 
since what is desired is to get cutting started on a sane and profit- 
able basis, and this a mere general method of work usually fails to 
accomplish. Success or failure depends on whether or not buyer 
and seller can be brought together on a satisfactory basis. The 
work must be profitable to both owner and dealer. A competent 
and well-informed field agent can work out a comprehensive plan 
for disposing of all the merchantable chestnut in a commmunity. 
Through his knowledge of prices, rates, specifications, sanitation 
measures, etc., he is the means of saving timber owners from much 
of the loss occasioned by the blight. 



DISEASE INVESTIGATIONS AND NUESERY INSPECTION. 

As before reported, the investigation of the blight fungus and 
the nursery inspection work are under the direction of Dr. F. D. 
Heald. Mr. P. J. Anderson has given special attention to certain 
field investigations, including the work at Charter Oak. State- 
ments of some of the principal features of the work here follow: 







@ ® 



41 



GERMINATION OF SPORES. 

Pycnospores of the blight fungus, sometimes called summer 
spores, germinate miich more slowly than the ascospores, or so- 
called winter spores. The type of growth and size of colonies are 
different in the early stages of development on culture media. 

PRODUCTION OF PYCNOSPORES IN WINTER. 

In the case of this fungus the term "summer spores" is very mis- 
leading, as these spores are produced at all times of the year, being 
washed down in large numbers from blight cankers following each 
winter rain. 

BIRDS DISSEMINATE THE FUNGUS. 

Careful experiments show that birds act as carriers of spores of 
the blight fungus. Thirty-six birds belonging to nine different 
species have been tested. Nineteen were found to carry pycnospores, 
the maximum number obtained from a single bird, (Downy wood- 
pecker), being 757,074. The highest number was always obtained 
from birds shot a few days after a rain period. 

"SHOOTING" OF ASCOSPORES. 

The ascospores are expelled forcibly, but this expulsion depends 
upon temperature as well as moisture. No expulsion took place in 
the field from November 26tb, 1912, to March 21st, 1913, the tem- 
perature during the winter rains being too low. Bark containing 
ascospore pustules has continued to expel ascospores for over six 
months, (in the laboratory). 

EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE. 

Pycnospores are easily killed by heat, (51°C). Ascospores are 
slightly more resistant, only a few being able to survive 57° C. 

RESISTANCE OF PYCNOSPORES. 

Pycnospores are easily killed under certain conditions, but can 
survive in considerable numbers under certain other circumstances. 
Their length of life in water depends to some extent upon the tem- 
perature. Thirty-three per cent, survived in water at 55°C, after 



42 

42 days. A large percentage can survive freezing for a consider- 
able period. They are washed down to the ground from blight 
cankers, during every rain, and have never been found to disap- 
pear entirely from the soil during the longest periods between rains. 
As many as 12 per cent, of those originally present in a soil sample 
have survived drying for 63 days. The longevity of the pycnospores 
is greater in the "spore horn" stage than when they are separated by 
rains and then dried. They have been killed in twenty-four hours 
by drying in certain tests, while the act of drying alone is gen- 
erally responsible for the death of 50-60 per cent. 



EFFECT OF DRYING ON ASCOSPORES. 

Ascospores when shot on to glass slides have been reported as 
being very resistant to drying. In nature they are generally sepa- 
rated and washed by the rains. Laboratory tests under such con- 
ditions indicate that they are very sensitive to dessiccation. Dry- 
ing alone has been found to kill as many as 94 per cent, in certain 
tests. 

ENTRANCE OF BLIGHT IN GALLS. 

A small gall on the chestnut due to a lepidopterous insect (moth) 
has been found to be one of the places of entrance of the blight 
fungus. Twenty-eight per cent, of those tested showed young blight 
infections. 

INSECTS AS CARRIERS OF THE DISEASE. 

Insects may act as carriers of the spores of the blight fungus. Of 
a total of 75 tested, many were found to be carrying spores. The 
maximum number of spores of the blight fungus (336,900), was ob- 
tained from a small beetle, (Leptostylus maculafa), which has been 
mentioned as a possible beneficial agent on account of its pustule- 
eating habits. 

OTHER DISEASES OF THE CHSSTNUT. 

There is another "canker disease" of the chestnut prevalent in 
the State which is entirely distinct from the blight. It is even more 
important as a disease of oaks than chestnut, and is known to oc- 
cur on chestnut oak, red oak, and white oak. A diehack of the 
chestnut is not uncommon. Still another fungus appears to be as- 
sociated with this trouble. A Up Might of the chestnut has also 
been found, and in connection with it, a third species of fungus. 



43 



FIELD INVESTIGATIONS. 

A field laboratory has all along been maintained at Charter Oak, 
and much of the outdoor inoculation work and other experiments 
have been conducted in that vicinity. Experiments have been con- 
ducted here on the rate of growth of blight cankers, details of which 
are tabulated in another manuscript, submitted for a bulletin. It 
is sufficient to say here that the retarding influence of the winter 
season is shown by these experiments. On the other hand, the 
cankers have continued to spread even in the winter, though the 
growth is much more rapid in the summer months. 

Inoculations have been made both with ascospores and with 
pycnospores during every month of the last year. No cankers have 
appeared as yet from winter inoculations. 

Other species of trees besides chestnut have been inoculated with 
the blight fungus in larger numbers than last year, special atten- 
tion being given to the oaks. As yet there is no evidence that the 
blight fungus will establish parasitic relation with any other host, 
although occasionally a canker will be produced. 

Careful tree surgery experiments have been conducted at Charter 
Oak, and to date only three cases are reported in which the canker 
continued to spread after cutting out and treatment. 



NUESERY INSPECTION. 

The office records give the following information in regard to 
each nursery inspection: — date, name and location of nursery, num- 
ber of trees inspected, number of trees rejected, fungicides used for 
dipping the stock, name and location of purchaser of stock. 

The nurseries from which chestnut stock was shipped during the 
fall of 1912 and spring of 1913, are as follows: — C. K. Sober, Paxi- 
nos. Pa.; Hoopes Bros. & Thomas, West Chester, Pa.; Lovett 
Nursery, Emilie, Pa.; Eakestraw & Pyle, Kennett Square, Pa.; 
Morris Nursery, West Chester, Pa.; Cheltenham Nursery, Oak 
Lane, Pa.; Jos. Moore, Montoursville, Pa.; S. L. Cummings & Co., 
Dewart, Pa., and Marietta Nursery, Marietta, Pa. 

In the fall of 1912, 6,538 trees were inspected. Of these 81 were 
rejected, and the remainder 6,457, distributed. In the spring of 
this year 5,305 trees were inspected, of which 195 were rejected and 
the remainder 5,110 distributed. The trees rejected were either in- 
fected with chestnut blight, or showed doubtful incipient infec- 
tions. In case of doubt the inspectors were instructed to reject the 
tree. The number of rejected t-rees, however, is no indication of 



44 

the percentage of blight in any nursery, since many diseased trees 
are removed from the nurseries previous to the time of making ship- 
ments, and only those thought to he healthy trees are offered for in- 
spection. 

Probably the greater portion of the trees went to purchasers in 
either Pennsylvania or New York. In case of re-distribution by 
other dealers, however, the final destination of the stock is not 
known. According to available records, the trees were sold to 
purchasers in the following States. — California, Colorado, Con- 
necticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, 
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, 
New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 
Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. 



INSECT INVESTIGATIONS. 



The investigations to determine what part, if any, insects take in 
the transmission of the chestnut blight have been continued under 
the immediate dii'ection of Pi'of. A. G. Buggies. A nuiaber of 
interesting facts have been determined, but several important studies 
were just well under w,aj when the work was suspended. 

The relation of insects to blight dissemination comes under three 
headings; first, insects that carry the spores of the fungus and 
actually start new infections at the time; second, insects that 
carry the spores but do not directly start infections; and third, 
insects that make wounds in which infection readily takes place 
through spores carried by some other agency. 

INSECTS CAUSING DIRECT INFECTION. 

To the present time very little definite data have been obtained 
on this point, but the longer the subject is studied, the_more prob- 
able it appears that ordinary insects traveling over a tree, although 
they may carry hundreds of spores on their bodies, do not directly 
start new infections. 

INSECTS CARRYING SPORES BUT CAUSING NO DIRECT 

INFECTION. 

Ants were allowed to run over cankers showing pycnidial pus- 
tules or "spore horns," and also cankers where ascospores were 
shooting, and then placed in flagk,s of sterile water and washed 



45 

from two to twenty-four hours. Plate cultures made from this ma- 
terial showed in many instances the presence of blight spores on the 
bodies of the ants. In the same way it was determined that other 
insects to the number of about twenty species also carry the spores 
of chestnut blight. The number of spores carried in each instance 
varied from a very few to the enormous number of 336,900. The 
particular insect, (Leptostylus maculata) , carrying the 336,900 
spores mentioned, is one of the beetles named in a recent press no- 
tice of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, as being very active 
in eating spores of the blight fungus. Therefore this beetle while 
destroying spores of the blight is at the same time covering its body 
with thousands of other chestnut blight spores which it carries 
from tree to tree, making it probably an injurious insect, instead 
of a beneficial one in this respect. 

INSECTS MAKING WOUNDS IN TEEES THUS OPENING THE 
WAY FOE INFECTION. 

This is probably the most serious way in which insects are re- 
lated to blight dissemination. Among the most serious of wound 
making insects are the seventeen-year cicadas, tree-hoppers, bark 
borers, and bast miners. Of these only two have been studied 
closely, — tie cicadas and the bast miners. 

CICADA STINGS. 

In 1911 there was a brood of seventeen-year cicadas in several 
counties in the eastern part of Pennsylvania. The relations that 
these stings bore to blight infection have been studied near Lehigh- 
ton. Many counts were made on trees and sprouts. While only 
4.3 per cent, to 10.4 per cent, of all stings were found to be infected 
with chestJiut blight, from 86 per cent, to 93.8 per cent, of all infec- 
tions were in stings. This cicada injury was studied where the 
blight seemed most abundant. In the same tract where blight was 
less prevalent, other counts were made with less striking results. 
These observations would seem to show that blight infection is in- 
fluenced considerably by the number of wounds made, but that 
infection many times does not take place through a wound although 
seemingly appropriate openings for catching blight may be present. 

THE BAST MINEE. 

The work of the bast miner was first called to our attention by Mr. 
S. B. Detwiler. It is believed to be the most important insect causing 
wounds in the chestnut. Experiments and studies up to the pres- 



46 

ent time make ijt probable that the bast miner is responsible for 
much blight infection. To understand thoroughly the relationship 
of this insect to the blight fungus, the life history has to be known. 
Much time has been spent upon this subject, but unfortunately to 
date, the work has not been completed.* The injurious period of 
its life history has been obtained, but the period that would have 
to do with its suppression, namely the adult period and time of egg 
laying, has not been discovered. 

LAEVAL EXIT HOLES AS POINTS OF INFECTION. 

. Hundreds of sticks of smooth bark trees of chestnut were ex- 
amined during the past winter and spring to determine the num- 
ber and nature of the larval exit holes of the bast miner. Every 
piece a foot long and over two inches in diameter had bast miner 
burrows present. The lowest number for a linear foot was one bur- 
row while the highest was fifteen. The number of exit holes for a 
small tree, therefore, would vary from ten to one hundred and 
fifty. In one acre of chestnut trees the number of these exit holes 
would be enormous. In the light of what we now know, recent 
observations show that 50 per cent, of this class of infections origi- 
nated in bast miner exit holes* 

CROTCH INFECTIONS. 

Many infections are known to start around crotches, and we 
speak of them as crotch infections. The eggs of the bast miner are 
laid near crotches and the newly hatched larvas may make entrance 
holes sufficiently large to allow spores of blight to enter. Here 
again the bast miner may be responsible, and if such proves to be 
a fact, this insect would be the indirect cause of 90 per cent, instead 
of 50 per cent, of the infection on smooth bark trees. All other in- 
sects mentioned as making wounds, with perhaps the exception of 
the tree hoppers, are local or else the number of wounds is not ap- 
preciable; but in the case of the bast miner, the insect is found 
wherever the chestnut grows. 

expj:riments with ants. 

Ants being found so commonly around blight cankers on chestnut 
trees, it has been claimed that in some instances they are respon- 
sible for as much as 90 per cent, of blight dissemination. To ob- 

*Since writing the above, Prof. Ruggles has produced the mature insect in breeding experiments 
and has thus completed our knowledge of its lit? (listory, and finds the insect to be a species 
new to science. 



47 

tain information on this matter, it was decided during the winter 
to experiment with ants in the greenhouse. Two rooms were set 
off as an insectary. The inner of these two rooms being thoroughly 
sterilized, was called the sterile room, and the outer room was called 
the blighted room. In the latter as much blight material of the 
kind required as could be obtained was kept and placed on the 
ant table, where three colonies of ants made their homes. From 
the table in this room the ants were allowed to run through a glass 
tube to sterile seedling trees in the sterile room. The ants were 
of the same species as those suspected of carrying the blight, and 
were the common mound-builders, (Formica integra), being ob- 
tained in the region of Lewisburg, Union County. 

The result of the experiment was that with the exception of a 
few dried leaves on each tree which were chewed or worked on by 
the ants, the trees in the sterile room are as healthy as when first 
placed on the table to be run over by the ants. The indication, 
therefore, is that ants are not responsible for blight infection. 



INFECTION IN GALLS. 

A more or less cylindrical gall is found on the tips of branches 
and on sprouts of chestnut, caused by an insect claimed to be a 
moth. At West Chester and Valley Forge, these galls are very 
numerous. Out of 161 galls examined by the plant pathologist, 
forty-five of the 28 per cent, showed the presence of blight, while 
49 per cent, showed the presence of another fungus. A gall that 
shows the presence of chestnut blight in such a large percentage of 
cases should be given careful study. 



CHEMICAL INVESTIGATIONS. 



EXCESS OF TANNIN IN DISEASED WOOD. 

The principal features of the chemical investigations which have 
been continued in charge of Mr. Joseph Shrawder, are as follows: 

The abnormal tannin content of infected material was the chief 
subject of interest in the last report. Invariably, infected wood 
and hypertrophied material continue to show a higher tannin con- 
tent than sound material from the same sample. 

4 



48 



LOSS OF VOLATILE MATTER. 

Moisture and other volatile matter proved of interest also. By 
prolonged heating at temperatures up to 155°Cj infected material 
showed a greater ratio of loss. 

CELLULOSE DETERMINATIONS. 

A series of cellulose determinations was also made to note the 
effect of the fungus on wood and bark. A higher percentage of 
cellulose in sound material leads us to believe that it is being di- 
gested with the formation of acids and other soluble matter. It 
may also be that part of this soluble matter is reported as tannin 
by the hide powder method. This, with the deficiency of cellulose, 
may account for the relative high tannin content appearing on 
analysis. 

CHEMICAL CHANGES. 

The determination of starch, reducing sugar, and nitrogen shows 
that decided chemical changes are being produced by the fungus. 
However, this work was not brought to a satisfactory conclusion 
owing to the sudden termination of the work of the Commission. 

NEW INJECTION MATERIAL FOR TREE MEDICATION. 

Some preliminary work was also started in a search for a suit- 
able injection — material to be used in the tree-medication experi- 
ments. It is evident from the chemical investigation that a suit- 
able injection-material must not coagulate the excessive tannin 
and other colloids in the wood and bark, and that it must be able 
to penetrate cutin in suberin in order to diffuse properly through 
the infected area. A brief investigation of a modified chlorine solu- 
tion showed that it fulfilled these requirements in many respects, 
but its value in treating trees has not been determined. 



TEEE MEDICATIOK 



The experiments in tree medication, in charge of Dr. Caroline 
Rumbold, have been for some time conducted in a large chestnut 
orchard located near Martic Forge, Lancaster County. The follow- 
ing is a brief statement of recent work: 



49 

PLOTS UNDER EXPERIMENT. 

In 1912 three plots were selected for experiment. Each con- 
tained about fifty trees varying in age from seedlings to eighteen 
years old. This year two new plots were added to the three of 
1912. Some tree surgery work was done, and the trees sprayed 
with lime-sulphur. 

OBSERVATIONS OF THE WORK OF 1912. 

Last year fifty-four trees were injected; 15 with salts of the 
heavier metals; 5 with formaldehyde; 12 with stains; 22 with alka- 
lies, and the remainder with water. An attempt was made to inject 
two trees with canker extract, but the solution would not go into 
the trees. 

On June 7, 1913, results of observations on these trees injected 
last year were made as follows: 

To date, the injections of the salts of the heavier metals, (copper, 
zinc, barium), appear not to have killed the trees, although they 
mutilated them. Those injected with the copper salts suffered the 
most. Inoculations made on these trees after they were injected 
have taken, and the cankers forming are larger than those on the 
check trees. Of the five trees injected with the formaldehyde, two 
are alive, but mutilated. Inoculations on these trees have formed 
cankers larger than those on the check trees. Most of the trees 
injected with stains have been cut down, for observation. None were 
killed, however, by the injection. The trees injected with water 
are in good condition with the exception of one tree infected with a 
canker, which is now girdled. The only unusual sign about the tree 
is the large amount of suckers at its base. 

FAVORABLE EFFECTS OF ALKALIES. 

The trees injected with alkalies are all in good condition at pres- 
ent. An encouraging feature of the experiment with alkalies is 
tiat a number of inoculations on these trees did not take, and on 
those which have taken cankers have formed smaller than those on 
the check trees. These trees were cut into in April in order to 
count the number oi inoculations that took, and in a number of 
cases these cuts have formed callus. 

INJECTIONS IN 1913. 

The past spring, 69 trees have been treated — 21 with colloids, 18 
with alkalies, 18 with acids, 17 ■\\dth benzenes, one with methyl 
alcohol, and two with methylene blue, while five are water checks. 
The method of injection used this year is the same as in 1912. 



50 



EFFECTS OF THIS YEAR'S INJECTIONS. 

The trees have not reacted to the injections this year as quickly 
as last summer. The slowness of reaction may be due to the season 
of the year, the cool weather, and the large amount of rain since 
injections began. As was to be expected, the trees have reacted 
to the injections differently. Potassium chromate and bichromate 
caused the fastest and most severe reactions. Reactions of the 
trees to the chemicals are generally shown by discoloring, drying, 
or falling leaves. Sometimes the trunk shows the path the solu- 
tion followed by sunken areas, or long cracks in the bark, extend- 
ing up the tree. So far no results can be given as to the effect of 
this year's injections, either on the trees themselves or on the 
canker growth. The full effect of the present injections probably 
cannot be seen until next year. 



TEEE SUEGEKY. 



INDIVIDUAL TREE EXAMINATIONS. 

The tree surgery work was continued in charge of Mr. Roy G. 
Pierce. A brief statement of the work here follows: — 

Numerous requests for examinations of individual trees have 
been received continuously up to the time of closing our work. 
These requests have come from owners of individual lawn trees,' 
owners of cultivated orchard trees, and owners of wood lots or 
small forest properties. When desired the owners or the gardeners 
were instructed how to take care of the trees. This is the most 
satisfactory way of handling this kind of work, since frequent 
examinations during the growing season are necessary to keep the 
chestnut blight under control. The owner, if well informed, may 
notice a diseased twig or branch at any time and remove it before 
the infection has spread any further. On request, the names of 
reputable tree surgeons have been given the owners. 

ADVICE IN FOREST MANAGEMENT. 

Frequently where there have been a large number of infected 
chestnut trees in the forest, as on Mount Penn and on the Never- 
sink Mountain at Reading, or at Galen Hall, Wernersville, Berks 




Tree surgery. Operator has gouged outer rim of canker, leaviug mycelium of 
chestnut blight in center. Other cuts shown on tree were made at an 
earlier period. 



81 

County, the owners have not been so desirous of prolonging the life 
of the chestnut trees as of maintaining a grove or woodlot of trees 
of different kinds. In such cases the first principles of forestry 
have been recommended, namely, requiring the removal of trees that 
were becoming badly diseased, thus giving place to other tree 
species coming up beneath, sucb as hickories and oaks, instead of 
advising any tree surgery. 

CONTACT WITH THE PEOPLE. 

In thus meeting the people themselves, it has been possible to in- 
form them much more thoroughly on the real cause of the blight 
than can be done through the medium of bulletins or newspaper 
articles. Many still think that the chestnut blight is caused by 
an insect or a mysterious something that kills the trees by descend- 
ing on them as a vapor. To these people, however, "seeing is be- 
lieving." 

EXPERIMENTS. 

Experiments have been started at different points: — (1) On 
methods of cutting out cankers; (2) With substances used as 
sterilizing agents and as water-proofing; (3) On the charring of 
cankers for various periods of one to five minutes; and (4) On the 
uses of various fungicides and water-proofings for painting over 
the cankers. 

EXPERIMENTS WITH LIME-SULPHUR. 

The use of the lime-sulphur spray to prevent infection has been 
experimentally tried at several places on orchard chestnut trees. 
One of the most important of these experiments is one that was 
started in Chester County in an orchard of 200 chestnut trees, 41 
trees being used for the experiment, the trees ranging in height 
from 15 to 35 feet, and about twenty-five years of age. At the time 
of closing the work of the Commission, these experiments have not 
yet been continued for one year, therefore no definite results have 
been obtained, nor can any definite conclusion be drawn. 

ALLEGED CURES FOR THE BLIGHT. 

Besides the trials of different treatments at Emilie, Bucks county, 
mentioned elsewhere, three residents of Pennsylvania, who claim 
they have cures for the chestnut blight, have been permitted to dem- 
onstrate the efficacy of their cures at other points. Two of these 
"cures" are already failing at the present time. 



52 



LOCATION OF CANKERS. 

An observation which may be of importance is that blight cank- 
ers are very seldom found to have started on the underside of 
branches. 

VALUE OF TREE SURGERY WORK. 

The work of tree surgery thus far has shown that it is possible 
to save chestnut trees that are diseased with the chestnut blight. 
This can only be done, however, by the most careful tree surgery, 
followed by frequent examinations for new infections and the 
spread of the old ones. Young, smooth bark trees are more easily 
saved than old thick bark trees, because it is much easier to dis- 
cover the blight on the former than on the latter. 

OTHER TREE SURGERY WORK. 

In addition to the tree surgery work under the immediate direc- 
tion of Mr. Pierce, other competent employees of the Commission 
have done similar work at Emilie, Charter Oak, and in a large 
orchard at Paxinos, the results of which up to this date are con- 
sidered as largely successful. 

The accompanying figures, No. I and No. II, will illustrate cer- 
tain phases of the tree svirgery work. 



GEOGEAPHIC WOKK. 



WEATHER CONDITIONS. 

A brief statement of some additional work by the Geographer, Dr. 
F. P. Gulliver, follows:— 

Since the last report very few definite facts have been obtained 
as to the relation of rainfall to the spread of the blight, but noth- 
ing has yet been learned which would contradict the opinion pre- 
viously stated that blight dissemination increases much more 
rapidly during rainy periods. 
» 
RELATION OF SOILS TO BLIGHT OCCURRENCE. 

Considerable time has been given recently to a study of the char- 
acter of the soils in different localities in the State where there is 



53 

more or less chestnut blight, to determine whether there is any real 
relation between the nature of the soil, and the amount of the dis- 
ease in any locality. 

LOCATION OF OBSERVATIONS. 

After a careful survey of the State, it was decided to conduct this 
study in — (1), Chester Valley; (2), The Kutztown Valley, Berks 
County, and (3), Center County. To date, there has been time 
only to make observations in the first two localities. In the Chester 
Valley these studies have been much facilitated because of the con- 
stant occurrence of limestone toward the base of the mountains, 
and of shales toward the top. Usually, more chestnut blight was 
found near the tops of the mountains, and less, as one descends to- 
wards the valley. 

RESULTS OF OBSERVATIONS. 

The results of these observations on the relation of limestone or 
other alkaline soils to blight distribution, are as follows, which 
are simply, however, what appear to be the facts obtained from 
studies to date, and are not put forth as absolute conclusions. 

(1) — In every series of tracts taken from limestone to overlying 
shale soils, the percentage of blight is least at a comparatively 
short distance (50 to 200 ft.), from the edge of the limestone. 

(2) — Tracts on soils derived from limeston^e which show the 
highest percentage of blight seem to be those where the soil has 
become acid from underground drainage, and consequent leaching 
out of the alkalies. 

(3) — Chestnut trees on soils derived from other alkaline rocks 
show less blight than is found in the trees on shale soils with lime- 
stone underneath. 

(4) — ^Where the rocks have been faulted, and an older crystalline 
rock has been brought up to the level of the later formed limestone, 
there does not appear to be any less blight on the crystalline rock 
near the limestone. 



RELATION OF ALTITUDE TO BLIGHT DISTRIBUTION. - 

On about 200 tracts examined, there does not seem to be any re- 
lation between the percentage of blight and the elevation above 
sea level. 



UTILIZATION. 



.At the time of the last report, the work of "Utilization" was in 
charge of Professor J. P. Wentling. He continued to direct this 
work until March 1, 1913, when his leave of absence expired, and 
he resigned to resume his duties in the Forest School of the Uni- 
versity of Minnesota. From that date, Mr. W. M. Kirby acted in 
charge of the office work, while Mr. J. R. Wilson was made directly 
responsible for the field operations. Until a suitable specialist 
could be obtained, the General Superintendent, Mr. S. B. Detwiler, 
has had general direction temporarily, of all the utilization work. 

PRELIMINARY WORK. 

For sometime, naturally, a great deal of information had to be 
obtained as to timber owners, purchasers of chestnut products, 
portable saw mills, demands for various kinds of products, etc., be- 
sides working out a general plan of active procedure. This had 
been largely done by Professor Wentling, before leaving, and he 
had already pointed out the importance of the portable mill opera- 
tor, the necessity of experiments in deterioration of blighted chest- 
nut, and of making tests of certain chestnut products through 
reputable manufacturers, and also the desirability of a trial of 
intensive local utilization in a few localities, and showed that it 
was desirable to keep in close touch with the important lumber as- 
sociations. 

CONCLUSION'S OF UTILIZATION CONFERENCE AT 

TRENTON. 

At a Utilization Conference between various State and National 
oflQcials held at Trenton, New Jersey, certain conclusions were arrived 
at as to special lines of work in utilization. Among these, it was 
recommended that the individual States take up local market 
studies. 

LOCAL INTENSIVE UTILIZATION. 

In accordance with the conclusions of the Utilization Conference 
above mentioned, and in line with the suggestion of the Forester of 
this Commission previously in charge of Utilization, it was decided 
to try such local work at one or two points in this State, the work 
being under direction of the General Superintendent. The first 
place selected was in the vicinity of West Chester, Chester county. 



55- 

Tlie local market for various chestnut products was thoroughly ex- 
ploited to determine what amount could be taken care of in local 
consumption, and afterwards it was determined so far as possible, 
how much of the surplus could be disposed of at more distant mar- 
kets. The results of the work have been very interesting, and bid 
fair to solve largely the entire problem of utilization. 

EESULTS OF THE LOCAL WORK. 

In the short time that has been given to this work, up to the date 
of closing, remarkable progress has been made, as the following 
statement shows: — 

(1) — Careful estimates of timber were made of 14 tracts, in the 
vicinity, ranging in size from 2 to 26 acres each. 

(2) — Various satisfactory interviews were obtained with the tim- 
ber ownei's, and in this connection, it was found that there has been 
much change in the sentiment of owners, favorable to a rapid dis- 
posal of blighted chestnut. 

(3) — All local timber operators were interviewed. 

(4) — It was found that the owners themselves could use a large 
amount of their own timber for fencing. 

(5) — Lists of buyers of chestnut products were obtained at West 
Chester, Downingtown and vicinity, and along the Pennsylvania 
Railroad main line. 

(6) — After getting the confidence of timber owners, they were 
quite willing to place the disposal of their chestnut wholly in the 
hands of Commission employees. 

(7) — One thousand ties were sold to a street railway company, 
and orders were expected for 5,000 more. 

(8) — Arrangements were made for installing a saw mill in the 
area. 

(9) — At the time of closing the work, efforts were being made 
to obtain 20,000 poles for a firm in New Jersey. 

DIFFICULTY OF OBTAINING LABOR. 

In the particular local work above referred to, the difQculty of 
obtaining labor was encountered, as in all other cases of work of 
this kind. Here again, however, the Commission employes _ were 
able to aid timber owners and operators greatly by obtaining hands 
from a distance, until finally eight different timber owners were 
on the waiting list to use wood-cutters who had been imported 
through our efforts, 



5G 



WORK IN OTHER LOCALITIES. 

No doubt results similar to those mentioned above could be ob- 
tained in the same way in other localities. Such work was suc- 
cessful in Lebanon County, to the extent of being able to locate ten 
different portable saw mills in active work in that county inside 
of one month. 

DETERIORATION EXPERIMENTS. 

An experiment, probably the first of its kind, has been installed 
by this Commission in co-operation with the United States Forest 
Service, at Mt. Gretna, Lebanon County, Pennsylvania, to deter- 
mine accurately the effect of the chestnut blight on the quality of 
chestnut wood products, and upon the durability of such products. 
Chestnut telephone poles, some diseased and some from healthy 
wood, have been set. Thirty standard railroad ties, partly dis- 
eased, and partly not, were placed in a siding of the Cornwall & 
Lebanon Railroad. A fence was made with mortised posts and 
rails, some of them from diseased trees, and others from healthy 
trees. To determine the direct effect of blight lesions in telephone 
poles, cross arms were placed through these lesions; also some 
fence posts were set with lesions at the ground line. The complete 
results of this experiment will not be possible for several years, but 
it was expected to take records at regular intervals each year. 



CHESTNUT EXTRACT CHIPS FOR PAPER PULP. 

Spent extract chips from blighted chestnut wood which had been 
run through the leaches of a tannin extract company, were sent to 
the U. S. Forest Products Laboratory at Madison, Wisconsin, where 
experiments are being carried on to determine whether or not these 
chips can be used in the manufacture of paper pulp. 



TESTS IN CO-OPERATION WITH MANUFACTURERS. 

In connection with the above mentioned experiment, an attempt 
has been made to make similar tests in a practical way through co- 
operation with manufacturers. A small shipment of \chestmit 
chips was made to a company in New York State, to test its value 
for the manufacture of plaster board. A similar shipment was 
made to a company in Ohio which manufacturers special machin- 
ery for reducing wood, the idea being to test these chips for the 
production of paper pulp. 



57 



BLIGHTED WOOD NOT INJURED. 

Careful studies to date have shown decidedly that blighted chest- 
nut is injured very slightly, if at all, for use as lumber. The 
blight lesions extend to only a fraction of an inch below the bark, 
and even this portion is taken off in the slabs. To illustrate this 
fact, small hand samples of blighted chestnut in board shape, have 
been prepared and distributed to different chestnut users through- 
out the State. 

KINDLING AND FUEL TESTS. 

There has always been considerable prejudice against the use of 
chestnut for fuel, and investigations have shown that most likely 
this prejudice is to a large extent unwarranted. It was intended 
therefore, at the time of closing our work, to make practical tests 
of chestnut for kindling, in comparison with the common kindling 
"'oods now in the market. 

MOVEMENT OP CORDWOOD. 

The movement of cordwood under the special reduced tariff has 
made an excellent beginning. Several hundred cords have already 
been shipped, and a number of parties were preparing to ship large 
amounts when our inspection work ceased. The discontinuance of 
this inspection work will be a financial disadvantage to many tim- 
ber owners, who were expecting to take advantage of the special 
tariff, unless some arrangement can be made to continue such in- 
spection under other auspices. 

CO OPERATION WITH THE U. S. FOREST SERVICE. 

A list of pole and tie dealers has been furnished by the U. S. For- 
est Service. This list is being combined with a corresponding list 
of wood-cutters prepared by this Commission,, the whole to be 
made out in duplicate, which will be of great use for future work- 
ers in utilization in this State. 



DEMONSTKATION WOEK. 



The demonstration and lecture work has continued in charge of 
Mr. Keller E, Rockey. 



58 



LECTUKES. 

The subjects of lectures include every matter of interest concern- 
ing the chestnut blight. At intervals, parties engaged in other 
lines of operation of the Commission have lectured on topics relat- 
ing to the particular work they were doing. The most of the lec- 
tures were given under the supervision of the State Farmers' Insti- 
tute management. The lecturers were as a rule, supervisors of the 
territory in which the lecture was given, and were, therefore, fully 
able to give the audience news of the latest local developments, 
and much valuable information. 

Besides farmers' institute lectures, addresses were made at sev- 
eral normal schools, before county fruit growers' associations, at 
the meeting of the Northern Nut Growers' Association, and also at 
various meetings of botanical societies, civic clubs, and in colleges 
and schools. 

CHESTNUT BLIGHT EXHIBITS. 

Exhibits of specimens and illustrations showing in various ways 
the operations of this Commission have been installed in the Car- 
negie Museum, at Pittsburgh, and in the State Museum, in Harris- 
burg. An unusually large exhibit has been started for the Com- 
mercial Museum, Philadelphia, and it was planned to make an ex- 
hibit at the Everhart Museum, at Scranton. An excellent display 
showing the work of the Commission was made in connection with 
the State Forestry Exposition, at Horticultural Hall, Philadelphia, 
in May. Much interest was shown in this exhibit by people from 
all over the State. Many minor exhibits have been made in con- 
nection with farmers' meetings at various places. 



DISTRIBUTION OF SPECIMENS. 

Several hundred small boxes of specimens of disinfected bark 
showing the chestnut blight were sent to various addresses aU 
over the State, to be placed on exhibition in high schools and other 
public places. Photographs accompanied this material to add to 
its interest and practical value. 

FIELD DEMONSTRATION. 

Very often in connection with the lectures, particularly at farm- 
ers' institutes, the lecturers demonstrated the actual field work of 
the Commission in neighboring foi'est tracts, explaining the nature 
of the disease, the manner of removal, sanitation, and methods of 
tree surgery. 



59 



CO-OPEKATION OF THE PEESS. 



lu connection witli the vast amount of active labor performed 
in field work, pathological research work, chemical and insect investi- 
gations, etc., in the effort to control the chestnut tree blight, the press 
of Pennsylvania proved a most valuable ally in constantly acquainting 
timber owners and the public in general with the symptoms and 
characteristics of this comparatively new, but extremely destructive 
tree pest. 

The native chestnut tree is properly regarded as the best forest 
tree remaining in a large quantity in Pennsylvania. The presence 
of the deadly chestnut tree bark disease throughout eastern and 
central Pennsylvania counties, and the actual and immediate neces- 
sity for a concerted and active warfare against this parasitic disease 
in order to prevent the threatened total extermination of the chestnut 
tree in the Keystone State, naturally awakened the editorial fra- 
ternity and other advocates of forest conservation to the great im- 
portance of aiding in the fight to control and eradicate the dis- 
ease. 

It is admitted by scientific authorities that had the necessary work 
towards stamping out the blight been inaugurated by other states 
at the proper period, Pennsylvania's extraordinarily heavy loss could 
have been confined to a minimum. It is believed however, that the 
Commonwealth has already sustained a loss through the partial 
destruction of chestnut, aggregating a total of |70,000,000, of which 
enormous amount Eastern Pennsylvania timber owners suffered the 
heaviest burden. The probervial "ounce of prevention" was sadly 
ignored, and hence, the deplorable conditions that rapidly followed 
this costly neglect of duty. Although the Keystone State has ceased 
its activities in its efforts to save this invaluable species of trees 
from destruction, the National Department of Agriculture and a 
dozen other states are continuing the work with renewed energy, con- 
fidently believing that the interests of timber owners and the public 
in general deserved such recognition and protection. Many tax- 
payers who were compelled to wage warfare against the spread of 
the blight at their personal expense report gratifying results, thus 
again demonstrating that by prompt action and thorough work, 
the parasite might have been controlled and these extraordinary 
heavy financial losses averted. 



Oliver D. Schock, Assistant Superintendent, was in charge of this 
important publicity department. Grateful acknowledgments are due 
to the newspaper editors for their continued and liberal co-operation. 
It is equally gratifying to know that there was but little, if any 
unfavorable criticism by the press of the entire State of the methods 
pursued by the Commission in combating the blight. 



Report of 

Samuel B. Detwiler 

General Superintendent Pennsylvania Chestnut 
Tree Blight Commission 



(61) 



I^ATA^ 




(62) 



OBSEEVATIONS ON SANITATION CUTTING IN 

CONTEOLLING THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT 

IN PENNSYLVANIA. 



By SAMUEL B. DETWILER, 
GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT OF THE PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT 
TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION. 



INTRODUCTION. 

In view of the continued rapid spread of the chestnut blight, and 
the great damage sustained through this relentless parasite, it is 
important at the present time to have more complete information 
on the possibility of controlling its spread. It is how an estab- 
lished fact that the disease exists in China, and that it was probably- 
introduced into America from the Orient. This disposes of the 
theory that the blight is caused by a native fungus, originally a 
saprophyte or weak parasite, which gained vigor, or appeared to 
gain vigor because of the decadence of the native chestnut trees 
from the effects of drouth and winter injury. It is evident that 
it would be difficult, if not impossible, to control a native fungus of 
wide dissemination, with predisposing factors in its favor. But 
even the most severe critics have acknowledged that foreign origin 
of the parasite affords "at least some basis for the fight for con- 
trol."* 

HOW THE BLIGHT SPREADS. 

The pathological investigations of the Commission have shown 
that wind, water (rain), and birds are the principal agencies in dis- 
seminating the blight. A single spore thread may produce from 
100,000,000 to 200,000,000 pycnospores, and even a smaU canker 
produces dozens of spore threads in a season. A single perithecium 
has been observed to eject ascospores almost continuously for a 
period of 26 days, at the rate of 4.7 spores per second. Insects as- 
sist by making wounds through which the spores of the fungus en- 
ter the bark, and also, to some extent, by distributing the spores 
locally. The ejection of ascospores into the air following rain, and 
the washing of pycnospores down the trunks and into the soil dur- 
ing rain, appear to be the principal agencies in spreading the dis- 
ease. Birds have been proved to carry spores in great numbers, 
and undoubtedly are responsible for a certain proportion of infec- 
tions, at least, of advance infections. 

•Clinton, G. P. Science 36: pp. 907-914, Dec. 27, 1912. 

(63) 
5 



64 

The planting of diseased nursery stock in regions free from the 
blight appears to be one of the principal agencies in spreading the 
disease to great distances. The disease was probably introduced into 
this country on nursery stock, and in the early years, nursery stock 
apparently played the most important role in getting the disease 
quickly and firmly established. This point is well illustrated by a 
shipment of three chestnut trees sent from a New Jersey nursery 
into Western Pennsylvania in 1912. Through a misunderstanding, 
these trees were not held at the State line for inspection, but were 
carried direct to their destination. When the inspection was made, 
the disease was found at two places on one of the trees, although the 
nurserymen claimed to have carefully examined the trees before 
shipment. At Warren, Warren county, Pennsylvania, 11 out of a 
.shipment of 12 nursery trees purchased in 1910 were found affected 
with the blight in 1912. In Elk County, 34 diseased nursery trees 
were found in a young chestnut orchard, and the disease had already 
reached adjoining native chestnut trees. In Somerset County, there 
is evidence to support the belief that an infected area covering 
about one-third of the county spread originally from diseased sciens 
grafted on native trees. There are many similar occurrences out- 
side of Pennsylvania. 

All observers have noted that the blight advances by attacking 
widely separated trees far ahead of the generally infected territory. 
In Penn.sylvania, the main spread of the blight has been from the 
southeastern corner of the State. During rains and immediately 
following, when the spores are being ejected, the wind is usually 
from the south or east, thus tending to carry the spores north and 
west. At least, it is a matter of common observation that the south- 
ern and eastern edges of woodlots very frequently show the first 
infections. 

In order to learn more about the spread of the blight, two areas 
in the region of general infection, one in the Mahoning Valley in 
Carbon County, and the other in the vicinity of Topton Mountain, 
in Berks county, were studied in the spring of 1913 by Mr. J. Wesley 
Sitler, a field agent of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. 

STUDY OF BLIGHT CONDITIONS IN THE MAHONING 

VALLEY. 

In the Mahoning Valley, all timber tracts on an area about 
7 miles square were mapped on a large scale topographic sheet, (Fig. 
1). In round numbers this investigation covered about 50 square 
miles of land which varied widely as to elevation and geological 
formation. Spot infections of blight were accurately located on 



*- 1, t,jjivj j-i. capita 



of gullies; or, where a ridge slope forms a terrace-like flat. How- 




PcrtiO'it c/ 

C.--.0'. % Schuylkill tV 

Penne 

■< - fl«»n/ .nfrtt 

(t~)- Bi-i'^t CcU'. •'■'■ -. . • 



Skcti-li msip shnwins blight ci-nters and percentage of iif.'ctiou in ii portion of the Miihoning Vullcy. Carbon nnd-ifliiiylkill ('I'liiiti.'s, P.'iin>iylv;inin . 

3ly J. W.'sloy Sit>r. 
Juno. lf)]:r 



formation. Spot infections of blight were accurately located on 



65 

the map, and each spot was studied in detail as to the percentage 
of surrounding infection, slope, exposure, soil, character of the 
stand of timber, and surface features. Originally chestnut oak and 
yellow pine occupied the steeper upper slopes, while the more gen- 
tle and fertile lower slopes were covered with a stand consisting 
of 50 to 70 per cent, chestnut, with a mixture of red oak, maple, and 
white pine. Very little chestnut grew in the valleys where the 
forest consisted of heavy stands of white oak, white pine, red oak, 
and maple. All of the flat bottom land and much of that along the 
lower slopes has been cleared for farming, so that part of the area 
studied consisted of woodlots with trees varying in size from small 
coppice to 20 inches in diameter. The area is traversed by several 
ridges extending northeast and southwest, and the poor rocky soil 
of these ridges, particularly north of the Mahoning Valley, is cov- 
ered with young coppice of oak and chestnut, or with scrub oak 
brush. Forest fires frequently burn over the ridges and the young 
growth is therefore in poor condition. 

At present no tract can be found on tlie area studied that is en- 
tirely free from blight, but the chestnut trees south of Mahoning 
Valley are diseased more than the stand north of the valley. The 
southern slopes of the ridges, also the south and east portions of 
exposed woodlots, are more seriously infected than the northern 
exposures. There are thousands of cicada wounds in twigs of all 
species growing in these woods. These wounds were made during 
the invasion of 1911. It is very common on chestnut to find such 
wounds infected, and the cicada has thus undoubtedly aided in 
the general distribution of the blight throughout this region. 

Every tract of chestnut timber showing the presence of blight, 
when carefully examined, shows that the disease appears in spots. 
By careful observation, the source of infection "for the entire spot 
can be traced to one or more badly infected trees which evidently 
bore the original infection of that particular area. Such a tree 
or group of trees is commonly referred to as an infection center, be- 
cause from such centers the disease advances in all directions. The 
age of these centers can be determined quite accurately from the 
appearance of the original infection, by the concentric rings of 
cankers and by the age of water sprouts and shoots at base of cank- 
ers. Generally, the older the infection, the further it has spread 
from the center. 

Many of these infection centers have been carefully worked over, 
but nothing definite can be said as to characteristic elevation, soil 
conditions, exposure, or character of woods. Probably 90 per cent, 
of these centers are found in the shallow depressions at the heads 
of gullies; or, where a ridge slope forms a terrace-like flat. How- 



ever, it is evident from a large number of observations, that such 
centers develop under any surface conditions favorable to the growth 
of chestniit. They are found on well drained gravel slopes, dry 
knolls, steep rock slopes, and in low fertile flats. 

The spread of the blight seems more rapid in young coppice 
growth of nearly pure chestnut, than in a chestnut stand of large 
trees. In old stands the percentage of infected trees decreases 
abruptly from the infection center outward. Often, a distance of 
twenty rods will take one from an area of 40-50 per cent, infec- 
tion to a zone of one-fourth per cent, and beyond that no infection 
may be found.' In coppice growth the decrease is more gradiial and 
a zone showing less than 8-10 per cent, infection can seldom be 
found on a tract with an infection center. The abundance of bast 
miner galleries in the bark of young smooth-barked chestnuts prob- 
ably explains the wide and even distribution of the blight in such 
stands. 

The importance of wind as an agent in disseminating blight can- 
not be positively stated, but from observations made in this locality 
there seems more evidence favoring wind distribution than any 
other factor. The result of a large number of comparative observa- 
tions show that: — 

1. A large number of infections are in wounds made by cicadas 
and are usually uniformly distributed around a blight center. 

2. New infections are generally scattered through areas of young 
shoots growing up after fire. 

3. Freshly cut stumps with their new sprouts show a high per 
cent, of infection even where the surrounding woodland is little 
affected. 

4. Trees standing in exposed places, such as isolated trees in 
fields, and trees .along southern edges of timber tracts, show a high 
per cent, of infection. 

Very little can be said about birds as carriers of blight. Numer- 
ous scattered spots of infection show signs of having been started 
by bird distribution. However, the observations gave little 
reliable evidence on this point. Many spots have a large, dead- 
topped tree standing near the center. Often these trees have been 
infected on the lower branches, longer than any of the surrounding 
trees. The dead, snaggy tops show no evidence of death from 
blight. There is reason to believe that birds were attracted by the 
open snag and carried the spores which later started the infec- 
tions in the lower branches. 

This locality furnishes numerous opportunities for comparing 
the percentage of infected trees on the north and south slopes. The 
stand of chestnut is similar on the two slopes. The results of de- 
tailed examinations show that there is more blight on the south 



67 

slopes. Also, many of the woodlots show a higher per cent, of infec- 
tion on the southern borders. To strengthen these observations 
several miles of the Blue Eidge, (lying north of the Mahoning Val- 
ley, and not included in the area studied), were also worked over, 
(Fig. 2.) This ridge is higher than any other within the limits of area 
studied, and shows the typical high percentage of blight on the 
south slopes, up to the summit. Immediately across the summit, 
northward, the number of blighted trees decreases. However, at the 
base of the north slope in almost pure chestnut, it increases but does 
not average more than 60 per cent, of the amount of infection at 
the base along the south side. There is a general decrease in the 
amount of infection on each successive ridge to the north. 

There are distinct differences in the moisture conditions in this 
region. The stream valleys often have a clay loam soil too heavy 
and moist to support chestnut. We find all variations in soil and 
moisture from these valleys to the dry, rugged ridges where chest- 
nut oak and scrub oak form most of the stand. The amount of in- 
fection apparently does not depend on soil moisture, as is shown by 
the percentages on the infection map. Tracts lying in the valleys 
.show similar percentages of infection to those on higher ground. 
The theory that chestnut trees growing on or near limestone soils 
are resistant to blight is not supported by these observations. A 
belt of limestone borders Lizard Creek Valley on the south, and the 
per cent, of infection is as high in that region as elsewhere. In- 
fection centers have been found near limestone quarries, where the 
roots of the chestnut penetrated to bed rock. 

INFECTION POINTERS. 

1. Each successive ridge shows a decrease in the number of old 
infections, from the Blue Ridge northward. 

2. There is more blight along the south slopes than on the ad- 
jacent north slopes. 

3. Recently cut stumps with their sprouts show a high per cent, 
of infection even where adjacent tracts are clear of blight. 

4. Centers of infection are found under all conditions. Slope, 
exposure, drainage, rock formation, and fertility of the soil seem 
to have no relation to origin of infections. 

5. A large number of infections one and two years old began in 
wounds made by cicadas in 1911. 

6. Wind appears to be the most important factor in the dis- 
semination of the blight. Birds may be factors as carriers of the 
original infecting spores, but cannot be blamed for the local dis- 
tribution of the blight around an infection center. This distribu- 



68 

tion is very uniform, Miiidi presumably would not be the case had 
birds been the principal carriers of the disease. In young cop- 
pice growth much wounded by cicadas, the wounds on the twigs are 
the chief points of entrance for the disease. Results of accurate 
counting show that on certain tracts 80 to 90 per cent, of new in- 
fections began in such wounds made by the 17-year cicadas during 
their invasion of 1911. Manv new infections nre at and near the 
bases of young sprouts, and tJiere is little cause to believe that these 
were due to birds, since they are usually about the same age and 
at points that birds are not liKely li frequent. Also, this condi- 
tion exists on exposed north slopes little visited by bii'ds. The 
most plau.sible explanation seems to lie in the hypothesi? of wind 
dissemination. This explains the numerous infections starting in 
cicada stings; also the rapid spread over a tract of young sprouts; 
the common occurrence of new infections on trees standing alone, 
in exposed places. The greater quantity of infection on south 
slopes appears to be due to the fact that the prevailing winds are 
southerly and easterly during the periods when ascospores are ex- 
truded in greatest numbers. 

STUDY OF BLIGHT CONDITIOXS ON TOPTON MOUNTAIN, 

BERKS COUNTY. 

The highest point of this mountain rises about 600 feet above 
the base, the summit being 1,230 feet above sea level. The long 
axis of the ridge runs about 15 degrees north of east, the east end 
of tlie ridge terminating abruptly. The area studied comprises 
about 2,000 acres, about 600 of which are cleared, and the balam-e 
bears a dense stand of timber which is mainly coppice growth be- 
tween 10 and 25 years old. On the summit, and the uppei' and 
middle slopes, chestnut is the predominating species, forming SO 
to 90 per cent, of the stand. Below this is a zone in which chestnut 
and chestnut oak constitute the stand in about equal proportions. 
At the base of the mountain there is a narrow, irregular belt of 
tuli]). butternut, red oak, and ash, with a very low per cent, of 
chestnut. 

Strips four rods wide were run nortli and south across the moun- 
tain, and also in an east and west direction over the top and along 
the sides. Observations were made of all the chestnut trees on 
each strip acre. In this way the tract was gridironed, and a fairly 
comprehensive idea obtained of the relative amount of blight in 
the various portions of it. fFig. 3). 

The infection nowhere runs less than 3 per cent., and it was im- 
possible to find an acre with less than this amount of blight on it. 



69 

On most of the ridge the percentage of diseased chestnut runs 
from 17 to 30 per cent., although tliere are spots where it is much 
higher. The centers of infection are not confined to any character- 
istic slope or environment. Generally, the blight has spread over 
larger areas on the summit and south slope than on the north 
slope. The centers along the south slope and summit show more 
trees killed by the blight than those of any other part of the moun- 
tain. This is doubtless due to a more rapid spread of the blight 
in these situations. Scattered dead trees are less common along 
the north slope than elsewhere; however, several centers contain 
ing a dozen or more large trees entirely killed are found on the 
north slope. 

The blight is so uniformly distributed between the centers that 
it was difficult to determine the facts relative to the dissemination 
of the disease by wind. However, most of the infected areas show 
a wider zone of distribution east and north of the infection center, 
giving the areas of thick infection an egg-shaped outline, with the 
oldest infections nearest to the western boundary. No definite in- 
formation was obtained on this tract concerning the part plaj^ed by 
birds as disseminators of the disease. 

The south slope of the ridge is more dry and barren than the 
north slope. The only springs found there are near the eastern end 
of the ridge, and a few small springs are scattered along the lower 
portions of the south slope, but these are below the zone of chest- 
nut growth. The north slope is a more gradual incline, and there 
are numerous shallow dips resembling miniature gullies. Some of 
these are moist enough to support alder bushes and several species 
of moisture loving ferns; also trees of the lowland types, such as 
tulip and maple, are quite common in these depressions. Most of 
these dips contain springs, but not all of them; however, there are 
numerous small springs scattered all along the north slope of the 
ridge. Most of these are well down toward the base, but several 
are well up toward the summit. So far as could be ascertained, 
no relation exists between the thickly infected areas and moisture 
conditions. 

The data collected lead to the belief that the infection is dis- 
tributed without any regard to elevation. For instance, along the 
base of the north slope high percentages of infection are found. 
Similarly, an increase in the percentage of blight is found half-way 
toward the summit. While the summit seems to support more in- 
fection than any other portion of the mountain, there is no reason 
to suppose that this is due to elevation. The stand here is almost 
pure young chestnut coppice, and the conditions appear to be more 
favorable to the rapid spread of the disease in such stands. The 



70 

base of the south slope supports coppice growth similar to that 
found at the summit, and here the per cent, of infection compares 
very closely with that along the summit. 

RESULT OF OBSERVATIONS. 

No definite cause for the areas of high and low per cent, of in- 
fection was determined. The highest percentages of infection are 
found on the summit and on the south slope of the ridge. Also 
this portion of the area supports more old infection than any other 
part of the mountain. In part, this may be due to the higher per- 
centage of chestnut on the summit and south slope, and to the 
fact that most of it is young coppice. Such stands appear very 
susceptible to the disease. The theory that varying chemical ele- 
ments, derived from the rock strata, aflfect the amount of infection 
is not supported by any evidence gathered in this work, for on the 
three general rock formations of this tract, as well as along the 
edge of the adjacent limestone, high and low per cents, of infection 
seem equally common. No evidence sheds any light upon the be- 
lief that the distribution of disease is along any definite compass 
direction. If there is any proof at all toward this end, it lies in the 
fact that infections on the south are more uniformly distributed 
than on the north. It is probably true that the advance infections 
came from the south and crossed the mountain northward, but areas 
of thick infection are not confined to any character of topography, 
slope, or elevation. 

The accompanying maps give in detail the percentages of blight 
found in the Mahoning Valley and Topton Mountain areas. 



RATE OF INCREASE OF BLIGHT IN EASTERN PENNSYL- 
VANIA. 

The southeastern corner of the State has a higher percentage of 
infection than any other portion of the State. The rapid increase of 
the blight is well shown in this section by the record of 1,637 trees on 
tracts in the vicinity of Philadelphia, which were examined for 
blight in October and November, 1910, December, 1912, and Au- 
gust, 1913. In 1910, 31 per cent, of these trees were infected with 
the blight, and 29 per cent, were doubtful. In 1912, 79 per cent, 
were infected, and in 1913, 88 per cent. If we include the 29 per 
cent, doubtful trees with the 31 per cent, certainly infected in 1910, 
the total becomes 60 per cent. This makes the annual increase in 
infection approximate 10 per cent, per annum. In this connection 
it is interesting to note that on the du Pont estate at Kennett 



c^ & 




w 5 


I? 


a ^. 


6' 


& = 




'y:^ 


? 
















to 














^^ 




o ^ 






71 

Square, Pa., where tree surgery methods, supplemented by spray- 
ing with Bordeaux mixture, have been in use for the past two years, 
the progress of the blight has been materially delayed. Mr. R. E. 
Wheeler, forester. for the estate, believes that these methods will 
save the trees under treatment for at least five years more, and 
probably for a much longer time. 

Tree surgery without spraying has had little effect in delaying 
the progress of the blight after it attacks a tree. In a large orchard 
of Paragon chestnuts, in Northumberland County, in a block of 
9,612 trees, 4 to 15 years old, thoroughly examined in the winter of 
1911-12, 194 infected trees were found, (2 per cent, infection), 103 of 
which were so badly diseased that they were cut out and burned, and 
91 trees were treated by surgical methods. In the winter of 1912-1913, 
this same block was again carefully gone over, and 1,064 infected 
trees were found, (11.2 per cent, infection), 325 of which were 
marked for removal, and the balance for surgical treatment. The 
rate of Increase in this case was over 500 per cent. 



INFECTION CENTERS ON THE ADVANCE LINE. 

In applying sanitation measures for the control of the blight, it 
is not practicable to use tree surgery methods and spraying, (ex- 
cept possibly in orchards), but only to cut out bodily every infected 
tree and to sterilize the stumps. When the blight is generally dis- 
tributed through a region, as is the case in southeastern Pennsyl- 
vania, it is manifestly impossible to eradicate the disease by sani- 
tation methods without also practically eradicating the host. A 
detailed study of spot infections as they occur on the western ad- 
vance line of the disease is therefore of more interest than the con- 
ditions which exist in the generally infected territory. 

On the advance line, as in the eastern part of the State, there is 
no rule for the location of an infection center, nor is there any 
rule as to the part of the tree which is attacked first by the dis- 
ease. It is true, however, that on the western advance line more 
infections occur on isolated trees and on the edges of timber tracts 
than elsewhere, and that the majority of infections first appear in 
the tops of trees. Likewise, in its spread from tree to tree around 
a center, the blight shows no general rule, except that the trees im- 
mediately adjoining a primary infected tree are most apt to show 
the first secondary infection. The following tabulation gives the 
details of 175 infected trees in a spot infection of 271 trees, lo- 
cated at Orbisonia, Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania, studied in 
1911 by Mr. R. C. Walton. 



72 



TABLE I. 
DETAILS OF INFECTION AT ORBISONIA, PA. 



Origin of tree. 



Slope, 



Aspect, 



Moisture, 



Density of forest, 



Infection on benches. 



Orientation of lesions, 



Coppice 

Seedling, 

Gentle to medium steep. 

Gentle to steep, 

Gentle, 

Steep 

Very steep 

Medium steep, 

North, 

Northeast 

Northwest , 

North to northwest, — 
North to northeast 

Lower slope, 

Middle slope 

Along road 

Near road , 

Away from road, , 

Dry 

Damp, 

Dry to damp, , 

Medium dry 

Medium damp , 

Windy, dry, 

I)L'nse , 

Modium densp, 

U'ather open 

North, 

East, 

South 

West, 

Northeast, 

Southeast, 

Northwest, 

Southwest, 



Number. 



6 
79 


61 



108 
16 
41 
7 



76 
28 
71 



28 
37 
61 

13 



72 
97 
6 



14 
21 
29 
10 
9 
5 













-^^^ J 








...-'^„.,>J"' 


.^-"-' 


,-. — ■'' 


^_^_... 










^y""^ ''''/"'I--' 


^ -' 


■^'^■^ ,^ .'' 










^^^i^ Z^'" 


/" 


^-'■^ .--'■^ ' '^ 








J^^^I^N 


' ,-'' 


"^^Z^ 


--^'" 




:^ 


i 


|K 


--^.^. 


-^ . ''-' 


_^,^'- 




'^ 




H| 


^ / 










1 


^^^^^^H 


^^^H^ '' -^^ 










1 


I^^hI 


P^nr' ' " 




\ 






J 


iHiP 


^v - 




\ 






/ 




'^ 








k ' 




_ 




I 

i i 


! 


1 




[\ -^ 






f 




4'-- 

i i 


■ ■ ! ■ 


Vj>- 










' « 


1 




/ 










■■ ■ ^ if , 




1. 














•^ 




1 










\ ■!■.■" 


'. i 
) 




N i 






i 
1 








■ ', y 




- / 




. o 


' 




'\ \ ' '\ 














\ 




































. o 














■ : 2 


o 












' 5 


-1 












I 














- c 














: 3 
















::? 












:■ ^ * 


^; 








■ '~- "'V 




^ o 














■ o 














3 
















'J 












;■ o 


-1 








^ 




; c 


::o 












" :z 










\ 




■< 


-■( 






- 






■V 


































V- ^ \\ 


it 


i ^ 












,y^'-\v 


11 


a «^ 




\ 








: ; ; ^ ; i; ^ S 2 j 


Mil- 




\ 








-■ -■ : i ^ ^'i ■ 1 " f 


: : i 












- ° ^ "■ - - 5 ^ ; ; 


: -i 












\'~-\ " ' ' ! '= i 














■- ! f " ? " S 


5 












5 ^ - i 1 


.. 







73 

The most important practical point in tlie study of spot infec- 
tions, however, is the location of the secondary diseased trees with 
reference to the original center of infection. Where a careful study 
has been made, it has always been apparent that the disease spreads 
from an original center of one or two trees to trees in the immediate 
vicinity, as illustrated in the accompanying diagram, which is an 
example of a typical small spot infection, (Fig. 4). 



PEOCEDUEE IN EEADICATING SPOT INFEC- 
TIONS. 



SCOUTING. 

The principal obstacle met in applying sanitation methods for 
the control of the chestnut blight is the high cost of locating spot 
infections. The cause of this lies in the great extent of territory 
which must be covered, and difiBculty in securing competent and 
reliable scouts at reasonable salaries. Experience has proved, how- 
ever, that thorough scouting can be done at a moderate cost under 
ef&cient supervision. Rapidity and efftciency in scouting vary with 
the size and density of the stand, the proportion of chestnut, the 
topography and location of the tract, and the prevalence of blight. 
The records of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission show that 
between October 3 and June 30, 1913, it required 11,651 days- of 
labor to scout 738,881 acres of timber, notify timber owners of in- 
fections found, and supervise the work of removal. This is at the 
vaU' of 63.41 acres per man per day, with the average of 2.07 in- 
fect ions found, and 1.49 infections removed per man per day. The 
average day, (not including time consumed in going to and re- 
turning froa; work), consisted of 8.2 hours spent in the field, .4 
hour lost on account of rain, and .4 hour lost on account of sickness 
and leave. With thoroughly experienced and practical men under 
competent crew leaders, an average of 100 acres or more per day 
can be covered, unless the spot infections are very large and numer- 
ous. In thick infection, one man can make thorough tree to tree 
examinations of from 2 to 5 acres, depending on the character of 
the timber. However, on the basis of past experience, it appears to 
be more practical and economical to locate the boundaries of the 
spot infection, and eliminate all of the chestnut trees within and 
immediately adjoining the spot infection, instead of eradicating 



74 

only the diseased trees. This plan reduces the amount of tree to 
tree inspection required, and one man should be able to scout at 
least 50 acres per day, even when spot infections are numerous. It 
has been found that a crew of two or more men can accomplish 
more and obtain better results than in the case of men scouting 
alone, except in a country where the woodlots are very small and 
scattered. 

In scouting, rapid and thorough work depends upon the experi- 
ence and capability of the crew leader. The size of the crew de- 
pends on the character of the timber to be scouted and the ability 
of the crew leader to handle men. Except in a very heavily tim- 
bered area, three men constituting a crew will usually accomplish 
more than a larger crew. There is an added advantage in a small 
crew in that two or three men can find accommodations near to 
their work where a larger number of men cannot, and must conse- 
quently spend more time on the road to and from work. In large 
tracts of woodland, the best plan is to establish a camp as head- 
quarters for several crews. A camp is too expensive for a small 
crew, but for a number of men it is economical, and has the ad- 
\'antage of keeping the men close to their work. 

The tracts must be scouted systematically. The best plan is to 
go back and. forth parallel to the backbone of the ridges, each man 
inspecting a strip 50 to 100 feet wide. In large bodies of timber 
four or five men can work together advantageously, each man being 
separated by the distance best adapted to viewing all the trees in 
the strip between himself and the men on either side of him. The 
man on the outside marks the edge of the strip either by breaking 
branches on the underbrush of species other than chestnut, or by 
marking tree trunks with yellow lumber crayon. Unless eradicated 
as found, diseased trees are located by pacing to the strip boundary 
at right angles and marking a tree on the line with crayon to indi- 
cate the location of the diseased tree. If a cutting-out crew closely 
follows the scouting crew, there is less waste of time and effort 
than where the scouting crew attempts to eradicate the infections 
as found, unless infections are very few and limited to single trees. 
With the cutting-out crew following the scouting crew, there is the 
additional advantage that they may locate diseased trees missed 
by the first crew. 

The greatest aid to eflQcient scouting is a pair of good field glasses. 
They often make it unnecessary to climb doubtful trees, and are of 
further usefulness in the hands of an experienced scout, because 
they enable him to locate many diseased trees from a high point of 
land or from tree tops. In such cases compass sights are taken on 
the diseased trees, and an assistant is dispatched to locate them. 



Thorough scouting fur the blight is uecessary. 



75 

Such scouting, however, cannot entirely take the place of more 
detailed examination. 

It has also been demonstrated that more and better work in 
scouting can be done in tlie fall and winter, after the leaves have 
fallen. In August and September the majority of new infections 
become plainly visible on isolated trees, but in dense woods the 
foliage makes it diflQcult to locate small infections. After the 
leaves have fallen, however, more light is admitted, and a scout can 
see for comparatively long distances through the bare tops, even 
in dense woods. The dead leaves on girdled branches are conspicu- 
ous throughout the winter and early spring, and where cankers 
have not yet girdled the parts, the increased light makes them 
much more prominent than in summer. Winter scouting has the 
disadvantage of fewer hours of daylight and occasional loss of a 
day or two on acount of snow storms that tend to hide the cankers 
on the trunk and branches. If the snow becomes very deep it is 
not easy to examine the bases of the trees sufficiently, and the snow 
also greatly interferes with the proper treatment of the blighted 
trees. 

In the work done by the Commission, the law required that the 
owner of diseased trees be notified to remove them within 20 days. 
A map or written description giving the location of the diseased 
trees on the tract, was also required by law. On private land the 
scouts kept field notes on the location of all diseased trees, blazed 
each tree to the wood and marked a serial number on it with black 
lumber crayon; on the side opposite from the blaze, a yellow manila 
tag was attached to the tree. These tags bore a printed notifica- 
tion that the tree to which one was attached must be cut in 20 
days, with directions for treatment and a warning against starting 
forest fires; they also bore the serial number of the tree, the name 
of the scout, and the date when attached. In this way the trees 
were easily identified later when approached from any direction, 
and by means of the "location sheet" giving the direction and dis- 
tance of each diseased tree from some fixed point, it was not dif- 
ficult to find the trees. The "location sheet" was made out in dupli- 
cate, one copy being handed to the owner of the tract, with a writ- 
ten request to remove the trees within the 20 days granted by law. 
The duplicate copy was sent to the field office, the scout retaining 
his note book. Some system of this sort is necessary when the cut- 
ting out is not done by the scouting force, but it is cumbersome 
and very expensive. Frequently, it required more time to fulfill the 
requirement of the law than would have been necessary to treat prop- 
erly the diseased trees on a tract. Much time was consumed also 
in very detailed inspection of the trees around a blight center, so 



76 

that apparently healthy trees would not be cut, since i'ae law pro- 
vided that healthy trees ordered to be cut, must be paid for. Not 
only was this very detailed scouting a waste of time in the light of 
recent investigations, but it resulted in decreased efficiency of con- 
trol because so many of the trees permitted to remain, in reality 
were infected. Although no disease could be found on them at the 
time, the disease developed fully after the spot was treated, neces- 
sitating several re-examinations before all infections could be re- 
moved. 

METHOD OP EEADIOATING A SPOT INFECTION. 

There are many points to be observed in removing diseased trees 
in spot infections, if the disease is to be perraanently wiped out. The 
main point to keep in mind is the fact that the fimgus propagates it- 
self more readily as a saprophyte than as a parasite, so that un- 
peeled logs, strips of healthy bark and chips from diseased trees or 
nearby healthy ones, if left in the woods, are almost certain to be- 
come infected. The principal object is to do the work in a thor- 
oughly sanitary manner at a reasonable cost. An experienced man 
acquired "tricks of the trade" that enabled him to do the work much 
more thoi'oughly and in less time than an inexperienced hand can 
do even a poor job. Great care was necessary in supervising the 
work of removal carried on by the individual owners, since each 
spot infection practically meant training a new man to do the work, 
and unless an experienced man was constantly on the spot, the 
work would seldom be done properly. On State forest reserves 
and in cases of forced removals, the work was done by employees 
of the Commission, and it was found that it was done at less cost 
and much more effectively than was usually the case elsewhere. 

The removal of an infected tree is best done as follows: First: 
Where the ground beneath the tree is covered with a dense growth 
of brush, this growth should be cleared away so that the chips and 
branches may be easily picked up. Small chestnut or chinquapin 
trees or sprouts should be cut flush with the surface of the ground 
and the tops burned. 

The stump should be made as low as possible. The bark should 
be first removed from the lower 3 or 4 feet of the trunk to an inch 
or more below the surface of the soil. If felled by sawing, peeling 
may be done after the tree has been cut down. During the fall and 
winter the bark is difficult to remove, and if the stumps are cut 
low, it is easier and cheaper to split off the sap wood and attached 
bark with an axe. In any case the stump and all exposed roots 
must be cleared of every particle of bark, and all bark removed 
must be carefully collected and burned. 



o 






^ 



O 



O 



o 



o 



^' 



c 



o o 



c 






o 



o 



o 






o 



o •© 



o 



o 



c 



o 



% 



o 



o o o 



o o 



o 



(^ Original infected tree, cut and burned December, 1911. 
@ Secondary infected trees, cut and burned December, 1911. 
® Secondary infected trees, December, 1912. 
© Secondary infected trees, August, 1913. 
O Healthy trees, 6 to 12 inches in diameter. 
Scale — 



Figure 4. 

Typical small spot infection, near Dry Run, Franklin County, Pa., showing 
original center and secondary infected trees. If all chestnut trees within 35 
feet of the nearest diseased tree cut in 1911 had been removed at the time of the 
first cutting, and all stumps properly sterilized, it would have prevented the 
appearance of the new infections of 1912 and 1913. 



77 

After the tree is felled, all portions above the stump which show 
mycelium or pustules of the blight must be peeled of bark or the 
entire piece cut out. This diseased material, the brush from the 
tops, the bark, and portions of the felled chestnut trees which are 
not peeled and which it is not intended to utilize must be burned. 
After the stump is peeled, if fire can be made over it without 
injuring the surrounding trees, and without danger of forest fires, 
the brush and refuse is best piled over the stump and burned. The 
fire must entirely consume or deeply char all of the material; no 
uncharred ends of branches and small twigs can be allowed to re- 
main without grave chances of reinfection. If it is impossible to 
make the fire over the stump without injuring the surrounding 
trees, the sides and top of the stump and exposed roots should be 
thoroughly coated with creosote. 

Portions of infected trees which show no evidence of the blight 
should not be permitted to lie unpeeled in the woods over twenty 
days, but may be safely handled and shipped with the bark on, if 
shipped as soon as cut. If the logs from the diseased trees are not 
removed from the woods within twenty days from the time the trees 
are felled, they should be peeled and the bark burned, or else the 
entire trees burned. Wood from diseased trees to be used where 
exposed to the weather must be peeled, or the fruiting bodies are 
almost sure to appear on the dead bark and become a source of in- 
fection. Fire wood, if kept under dry cover, need not be peeled.. 
One of the most important time saving items is to peel the lower 
portion of the tree before felling, and it is still more important to 
cut the stumps as low as possible. Bark remaining between but- 
tresses and deep crevices of stumps can be removed very readily 
by chipping down from a position directly over the low stump, 
which is not possible in the case of high stumps. A rake and a 
large coal-burner's basket included among the tools used in burn- 
ing, are very useful in cleaning the chips from the ground. Before 
starting the fire, all the leaves and debris for a considerable dis- 
tance around the place where the material is to be burned should 
be raked into a pile on which the fire is started. The bark and 
small particles of wood are raked together as soon as the brush is 
piled, instead of waiting until all the tops are burned. In this 
way, no large quantity of leaves and fine rakings are left until the 
end to smoulder for a great length of time before burning, and thus 
increase the danger of forest fire. 

All possible care should be taken to prevent injury to surrounding 
chestnut trees and sprouts in felling the infected trees. Observa- 
tion has shown that nearby trees are too frequently injured through 
carelessness, and the wounds are very apt to be a point of reinfec- 



78 

tion. Experience has also shown that unbarked stumps of blighted 
trees and green tops which are permitted to lie for a month or two 
on the ground are almost certain to become infected. The spores 
germinate on the sappy surface of the stump, and the mycelium 
grows downward through the cambium, and in the course of a 
year or two reaches the sprouts which come up around the base of 
the stump. In the case of the tops and particles of bark and wood, 
the decaying bark appears to be a very favorable seed-bed for the 
development of the spores that reach any portion of this material. 
It must be impressed on the workmen that the stumps must be peeled 
clean, and every particle of the diseased tree must be either burned 
or utilized in such manner that no opportunity is given for the 
saprophytic growth of the fungus. 

It has been found that painting the thoroughly peeled stumps 
with creosote is effective in keeping the stumps free from the 
pycnidia of the blight fungus, but is not so desirable as hard burn- 
ing over the stumps. In an experimental cutting at Wildwood Park, 
Harrisburg, 55 per cent, of burned stumps later showed blight, 
while only 23 per cent, of the creosoted stumps showed any signs 
of it. However, it is possible that in the future, many of the cre- 
osoted stumps will become diseased. 

The results of an extensive experiment at Anderson Station, Mif- 
flin County, are given below. This experiment deals with the ef- 
ficiency of burning over stumps as compared with creosoting 
stumps. The stumps in Table II were peeled at various times dur- 
ing January, February, and March, 1913, and cold creosote ap- 
plied with a brush. The cost of creosote and labor of application 
was approximately one-fifth of a cent for each six-inch stump, cut 
low. The data given below are the result of an inspection of these 
stumps made December 12, 1913. 




Center cif spot infection ;it St. Mary's, Elk County, Pa. This tree was infected 
at least four years prior to the time the picture was taken . 




C3 



O 



o 
w 



79 



TABLE II. 
RESULTS OF CEEOSOTING PEELED STUMPS. 





m 


^ 


z 


oS 




ft 

a 




g 


1 


g 


o 


s 


p 




a> 


ft 


ft 










p- 








*j * 




m 

o 

s 

o 


o 


i 


a 

o 


§ 


It 




bo 


§1 


"-S 




u 






tH 




CH 


























0=^2 




<H 


TS 


.as 


















^ 


03 O 


J3 










a 




B - 


a 


M 


o o 








p 




>j'~-' 




z 


< 


2 


0^ 


s 


C4 



1 


14 
S 
8 
6 
4 
4 
5 
3 

12 
7 
4 
3 
1 
6 
2 
5 
2 
6 
2 
4 
4 
6 

10 
3 
1 
3 


5 
5 
5 
6 
4 
5 
6 
3 
5 
7 
6 
6 
3 
6 
5 
3 
4 
6 
4 
3 
6 
7 
7 
5 
4 
4 
5 






Tes 
Tes 




2 


1 


Base 




3 ... ... 




4 










5 










6, 










7 










s 










9 


1 


Base 


Tes 




10, 




11 










12, 




13 










14 










15 










16 










17 




18 






Yes 




19 




'.'.....'.'.'.'.'.'. 




20 




21 




22 










Tes 
Tes 


Tes 


24, 


2 


Base 




25 




26 


1 


Base 


Tes 




27 
















6.2 


5.2 


0.0S5 
of sprouts 

0.148 
of stumps 










■ 







No pycnidia were found on wood of peeled stumps after creosot- 
ing, except in one case, where a large area of inner bark adhered 
to the stump at time of creosoting, and later raised up, exposing an 
untreated wood surface. The inner side of this bark and the uncre- 
osoted area of wood were covered with pycnidia. Creosote painted 
on thick bark at the base of stumps or on an exposed root does not 
appear to hinder the growth of the fungus. Hence, since stumps 
can be peeled but a very short distance below the soil, especially in 
winter, it is believed that creosoted stumps are more apt to have 
infected sprouts after a few years than burned stumps. The dan- 
ger point is at the ground line, and exposed roots and the crotches 
at the collar between roots are especially liable to have areas of 
bark that are missed in peeling. If this bark becomes affected, it 
brings the disease very close to the young sprouts that spring up 
around the stumps, and sooner or later causes infection. 



6 



80 

The stumps in Table III were burned in December, 1912. The 
data given below are the result of an inspection made December 
12, 1913. 

TABLE III. 
RESULTS OF BURNING OVER PEELED STUMPS. 



Number. 



i 


■^s 


■g 


g 


§ 








0) 


0) 


JiJ 




1-1 


J3 


•a 


■o 








m 


o 
























si 




SB 












JH p 


cd o a> 


£J o 


+J o 




IS- 


S.5?a 


as, 


5& 








p CO 


O to 




z 


■< 


z 


£ 


c 





1 

2, 

3 

4 

5, 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

n 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

IS 

10 

20 

21 

22, 

23 

24 

26 

28 

27 

2S, 

29 

Average, 



i 


3 









8 


6 


3 


Base 


Yes 




2 







Yes 


4 


4 












6 


1 


Base 


Yes 


7 


4 









3 


3 









2 


4 









5 


4 






















3 


4 









4 


3 









1 


1 









4 


3 









4 


7 









3 


6 









4 


4 


1 


Base 


Yes 


4 


4 









4 


5 









1 


6 









3 


5 









2 


3 









4 


4 









2 


2 









S 


5 






















2 


4 


1 


Base 


Yes 


6 


4 









6 


« 


2 


Base 


Yes 


3.5 


4.5 


•0.078 
to. 17 







Yes 
Yes 



Yes 



One very heavily burned stump, cut close to ground, had an area 
of diseased bark at crotch between roots, and a diseased sprout 
(No. 27). The least charring was always in crotches between roots 
at or near the soil line. Heavily burned stumps have weak sprouts 
or none, as a rule, about one stump out of twenty having no sprouts. 
Creosoted stumps usually have more and stronger sprouts than 
burned stumps. 

Creosoting is cheaper than burning over the stump, on account 
of the labor saved. While it is apparently effective where the 
peeling and creosoting are well done, burning is safer, although 
more expensive. A gallon of creosote costs about 15 cents and will 
treat from 50 to 100 medium sized (10" — 15") stumps, varying 
with the height of the stump and the temperature of the air and 





i^iM 



>iM: 



•^.i'i 






.KV„ 



^rii 



»* 



81 

creosote. The creosote may be protitably used where other trees 
will be injured by fire or where there is great danger of starting 
forest fires. Other methods of treating the stump have been tried, 
such as spraying the stumps with crude oil or kerosene and then 
burning them, after peeling. The stumps have also been buried 
under a mound of soil through which the sprouts had to penetrate. 
These treatments are less efiflcieut and more expensive than creo- 
sote and cannot be recommended. 

COST OF ERADICATION. 

The cost of eradication will vary greatly according to the condi- 
tions. If an average of 50 acres is scouted per day per man, at a 
labor charge of |2.50 per day to include the cost of supervision, the 
cost of scouting an acre is 5 cents. In a region of much blight, the 
cost of efficient scouting will run four or five times this amount 
unless the plan is adopted of determining only the edges of a spot 
infection, and then cutting out all of the chestnut trees inside of 
the area regardless of whether or not they show visible signs of 
the blight. This seems to be the most sensible plan, since the re- 
sults of reinspection show that it is the trees inside of the edges 
of the spot infection which in almost every case show reinfection. 
It will save money not only in scouting, but in future control. On 
. the Pennypacker forest reserve in Perry County where the infec- 
tions were thickly scattered, the cost of scouting and removal in 
1911 and 1912 on 1,620 acres was 73 cents per acre, or 52 cents per 
diseased tree, and this is probably the lowest figure for which the 
work can be done. The most expensive part of the work is the peel- 
ing of the stumps, and here a great deal can be saved by following 
the proper methods. In a large spot infection, the cost can be 
reduced considerably because of the concentration of the work. A 
spot infection of 822 trees, ranging up to 18 inches in diameter on 
the stump (average 6 inches) was cut out at a cost 'of |70.50 or 
8.58 cents per tree. This included peeling not only the stumps, but 
all merchantable portions of the trees, burning the brush, steriliz- 
ing the stumps, and cleaning up thoroughly. This cost, however, 
does not include scouting, which in this case can be figured at 2 
cents per tree. The total area of this spot was about three acres, 
so that the total cost of scouting and eradication was approximately 
129.00 per acre. In all but very small spot infections, enough ma- 
terial is produced to pay for doing the work. 

In Mifflin County, three men treated 2,341 clumps of six-year- 
old chestnut sprouts at an average cost of 20.3 cents per clump. 
Each man averaged 15 clumps per day; cutting, peeling, cleaning 



82 

up and burning were very carefully done at a cost of 16.3 cents 
per clump. Scouting, creosoting, and loss of time from bad weather 
cost an additional 4 cents per clump. The average acre contained 
205 clumps of chestnut sprouts, with an average of 5 five-inch 
sprouts per clump; 29 clumps per acre or 14 per cent, were dis- 
eased. The cost of thorough sanitation thus amounted to $5.89 per 
acre. The average daily wage was |2.40, including the cost of 
board and supervision. 

EFFICIENCY OF THE CUTTING-OUT METHOD OF CONTROL. 

To determine the efficiency of sanitation in controlling the dis- 
ease, a careful reinspection of 67 spot infections which had been 
treated a year or more previous to the examination, was made in 
the fall of 1913. The results of these investigations are shown in 
the following tabulation: 

TABLE IV. 

RESULTS OBTAINED, IN ONE YEAR, IN CUTTING OUT 20 
ADVANCE SPOT INFECTIONS OF CHESTNUT BLIGHT. 



County. 



s'S 



■g 


'%h 


•i 


























fl 


■'-'5+j 


o . 
a 




-^f= 




o 




m 


=■5 
















SS.S 




sg 


S5S 


%% 








% 


^ 


t 



"w o 



Blair 

Clearfield, .. 

Tioga 

Tioga 

Tioga 

Tioga 

Bradford, . . 
Bradford, .. 
Bradford, .. 
Bradford, . . 

Blair 

Cambria, .. 

Tioga 

Tioga 

Huntingdon, 

Blair 

Blair 

Blair 

Blair 

Huntingdon, 



Averages, 



April, 
Nov., 
Deo., 
Sept., 
Nov., 
Sept., 
Jan., 
Jan., 
Jan., 
Jan., 
Dec, 
Jan., 
Jan. , 
Dec, 
Jan., 
Feb., 
Jan., 
Jan., 
Jan., 
March, 



1913, • 
1912,* 
1912,* 
1912,« 
1912,' 
1912,* 
1913, • 
1913, • 
1913, t 
1913,* 
1912,* 
1913,* 
1913,« 
1912, • 
1913,* 
1913,1 
1913, • 
1913, t 
1913,* 
1913,* 



Feb.. 1914, 
Jan., 1914, 
Jan., 1914, 
.'an., 1914, 
Jan., 1914, 
Jan., 1914, 
Jan., 1914, 
Jan., 1914, 
.Ian., 1914, 
Jan. 1914. 
Aug., 1913, 
Jan.. 1914, 
Aug., 1913, 
Jan.. 1914, 
Jan., 1914, 
Aug.. 1913. 
jiug., 1913, 
Aug., 1913, 
.5ug., 1913, 
Jan., 1914, 



1 





1913 























































































9 












4 





1913 


5 





1912 


. 10 





1912 


1 





1913 


4 





1912 


3 





1912 


7 





1912 


1.75 








30 
70 
50 



♦Sanitation well done — stumps well peeled, well l>urned or creosoted, and refuse burned. 
tSanltation fairly well done, but stumps not thoroughly peeled or burned. 
§Sanitation poorlV done — no burning done, and stumps poorly peeler* in some cases. 



83 



be 

• r— I 



IS 

fl 

+-> 

09 

O 



o 



P 



o 

ft 

0) 

PI 

> 



H w 





O 

bD 

a 




o 



02 
O 






O 



OS 



-ai ^.saqjanj jo aouBjsia 



-at ijsepio JO b3t3 aiqBqoJj 



sdranjs pajBsj^ jo jaqranM 



■saaj;. pa^osjai jo asqraa^ 



■sjnojds pajoejai qi^iM. 



■paAOtnaj 
saaj;} pajoajoi jo aaqmnjj 



•paAoraaj 
saaj^, pai,oajui jo jaqranj^ 



«t- .e0"*eo* -o 






e>o -oioift ■ t- 



:a -.i 



a O^ A ^ 



03 O) * O C3 03 ' <7> 



OOdOOOO^OONCiOOr-lOoeioei'SiHOOeoOONiiiiO 



^SOHOOOOt-e'CQ■^*'Or-C'^N^S.^Mr^*l^r-»OIHTHOO^^O^ 



;i kJ ^. -.-<^, ..-: 



HOJ 



Si-ItH 



■^ ^ yH ^ ^ Q^ C^ ^^ TI^ 1- 
HCii-liHlH "-ii- 



!-■ tj (- f- f*» *^ jj- >> >i^ ^ ^ t- ■-■ ~ r- 






e>oe><soe>ooo©oe>oe'oe.©oeic>oe'e>oo©o©oe> 



o©e'eiOOoo«fr3w<ii4oO"*t-oC).HOOiaT-iMeoe- 



n o o> o 



osoj 



_-H--M-5;3S 



"e^„- S 









OCPPO 



OJ GJ 0,1-1 

n^ — _-B— & S --a -3 g £ a -X3 






^^ CQ ca c^ CO -^ t 



— t-C- tfi r 












i^CTO^^H^r- 



.ti^B 






■jaqrann jobjJj 



dj Qj 1/ a 
. .aotd oj 

a a a 



Mtjtjt-i-'-'-t-',:-'-' Mfc.I-rt-t-it-r-fcJf-.>-iI-+-I-iI-t-''-i*-i-'"-f- 

.,« .^ ._ .■« rt [3 ^ ri •■ - -J .— .r- .-H -H — - t- ._ .^ ,_ .„ J- .M .— .-^ jj « e; '-' "-I 



84 



H 

EH 



.S 
'-+-J 

O 

O 



-I-' 

S3 

d 

-t-J 
so 
a; 

O 



50 

o 

• i-H 

o 



o 

Oh 
02 

'^ 



> 
CO 



o 

fee 



pi 
o 



09 

>^ 
o 



Id 
a 



O 









-m :^sapto jo oSb siqEqojd 



sdnia;s pa^Baa; jo jequin^ 



■sa3j:t paioajni jo jeqrauM 






NOliHOO 



tOOiooe^^ N 



"Sinoids pajDajui qiiAi 
sdmrus p3:j'GaJl jo Jaqninjj 



J3^ O^^ 
0; Qj 4J l' O 



©(JST-fPSCJ 



•psAoraaj 
saoj:; pa:(,oajnt jo jaqmn^j 



5? 5^ ^"^ '^ 






SSSISK 



^2^ - - 

- .033 

1^ 1-5 VI ^ < 



•jaqtnnn puax 



■ "2 ■ ' 
. .«=i - - 

'3 33 OJ n c3 



^S'- 


-Pw 




H^-^ 








t^^ 


t- nS 








gs? 














■f=iiii 




•3 „ ^" 


iiS,;^ 


,^a^ 






^ en bo 






fe p a 


-J^ 


aS„ 




^-1 






85 



EH 

w 

I— I 
I-:; 
pq 

EH 

Eh 
m 

.H 
W 
u 

o 
o 

M 
EH 

O 
H 

12; 

M 
EH 

. O 

M PL| 
>■ 02 

pq M 

^ 1-5 
00 
Eh 

O 
|2i 

M 
EH 
EH 

p 
o 

;2i 

M 

o 

M 
<j 

Eh 
M 
O 

02 

EH 

P 
m 



■noT?03jn[ ^sapp jo oSy 






•sjnojcls pa^oajui mtAi 
sd^^n:^s pajBaj:^ jo jaqtiin^ 



■saai^. pg^oejnt jo jeqcnn^ 



•s;noads pajoajni q^iAi 
sdoini^s pa^Dajni j6 aeqtanM 



- "poAoraaj 
saej:^ pa^oajui jo jaqranM 



w S to m 

P S =3 :: 

fee a ti) bo 

3 o P 3 



o^oooooo 



■pSAoiaaj 
sa9j:j pa^oajni jo J9qma(c 









OJ =- S 2 t-" ^''^ 



« bo 



. a a 
. . o o 

a n 

- rf •" d c - a a 
HomWttSuW 



•jaqrana joc.ix 



H eg CO ^ lA eo t-oo I 



-a 

c 








Til 


3 QJ 








So 


o 


■a t>i 


















o 












p-M 



^5-0 



a; M ca 

C2 



P 3 I-. 

S 5; o 
p 9 « 

I ^ 

I ^ d 
OJ'S o 

o P 

111 

acq 
o o o 



c a a 
K en m 



86 



NOTES OF RE-INSPECTION. 

Over 60 spot infections located on the western advance line were 
examined between August, 1913, and February, 1914. The spots 
were located in 7 counties on the extreme western advance line of 
the disease, and also some distance back of this line. The cutting 
out had been done by practically as many owners as there were 
spots, under supervision of various field men, so that the condi- 
tions were averaged in every way. The point which was brought 
out most prominently by the re-examination was the fact that 
where the stumps were well peeled and thoroughly charred and 
where the tops and refuse were well cleaned up and burned, and the 
merchantable material promptly removed from the vicinity of the 
spot infection, there was no reinfection of the stumps or sprouts 
of the treated trees. Where the work was carelessly done, there 
was more or less reinfection. However, there were exceptions in 
both cases. In some cases where the work was done only fairly well 
or even poorly, there was less infection than might naturally be 
expected. In some other cases where the work was done as well 
as it can be expected under field conditions, there was a consider- 
able reinfection. This valuation is probably explained by other fac- 
tors which undoubtedly enter into the effectiveness of sanitation 
cutting. Probably the age of tlie original infection center is one 
factor governing the number of new infections which appear after 
the first cutting out. If the original infection is still so young 
that there is a comparatively small canker, or if the condition of 
the growth has been unfavorable for the production of ascospores, 
a small amount of new infection may be expected, since the wind 
apparently distributes most of the infection to the surrounding 
trees. On the other hand, if the diseased area of bark at the center 
of an infection is large and has produced a great number of peri- 
thecia. and the climatic conditions have been favorable for the 
ejection of ascospores, a large number of incipient infections are 
very apt to be left in the surrounding trees at the time of the first 
removal cutting. 

Just how long after cutting it takes these incipient infections 
to develop so that they can be detected in scouting depends on a 
number of conditions, such as the location of the diseased area on 
the tree and the height above ground where infection occurs, size 
of the tree, season of the year and climatic conditions following 
the occurrence of infection, location of the spot infection relative 
to topography, etc. Probably the most important factor govern- 
ing the number of new infections after a removal cutting is the 
character and quality of the man who scouted the area. Certain 




Healthy sprouts growing around a burned stu^p. 



87 

men have much better scouting abilitj^ than others, and in some of 
the spots examined, at least, this factor alone is sufficient to account 
largely for the conditions found on reinspection. However, even 
the best scout cannot detect small twig infections in the tops of tall 
trees before they have girdled the twigs, and it is frequently very 
easy to miss well developed cankers either at the base of large trees 
when no fruiting bodies have been produced, or on the upper trunks 
of tall trees before the tops have been girdled. 

It was very noticeable that new infections appearing in a spot 
where the original infection had been properly removed were al- 
most always within a short distance of the original infection. Prob- 
ably half of the new infections found, even after the second inspec- 
tion, were on trees that grew on the same stump or in the same tree 
group as an original infected tree, and 90 per cent, of the newly 
infected trees were so close that their tops interlocked or were di- 
rectly exposed to the tops of the previously infected trees. The ac- 
companying diagram illustrates the characteristic manner in which 
new infection appears. In several cases the farthest infection as 
noted in the tabulated data was an old infection which was missed 
at the time of the first inspection, and which really constituted a 
separated spot infection. 

Blight spots in northern Pennsylvania seem to be smaller, more 
widely scattered, and to spread less rapidly from the center than 
spots in the southern part of the State. One reason for this may 
be that there is, as a rule, a much lower percentage of chestnut 
in the forest and the chestnut appears to be sounder and in better 
health than much of the chestnut in the southern part of the State. 
Further south along the advance line, greater injury is noticed 
on young trees from the bast miner; damage from ice storms and 
hail storms also appears to be greater. Another possible factor is 
that the climate is warmer, and favorable to the copious formation 
and ejection of ascospores over a longer period than in the northern 
part of the State. Another possible factor is differences in topo- 
graphy which favor the carrying of spores long distances along reg- 
ular "air lanes." This may be the explanation for long chains of 
spot infections which occur along the lower edges of timber of the 
long, forested ridges, and on benches half way up mountain sides. 
This is put forth merely as a suggestion and not as a fact, although 
there is some evidence to warrant a hypothesis of this kind. 

The results of the investigation show clearly that the chestnut 
trees immediately within and adjoining a spot infection (say 25 
feet beyond the outermost infected trees), should be cut out and 
the stumps sterilized whether the trees appear to be infected at 
the time the cutting is done, or not (Pig. 4). The investigation 



88 

proves that these trees in the majority of cases will become infected 
later on, and it means extra expense and less effective control to 
wait until the infection appears. In very small spot infections or 
even those of considerable size, it is believed that such treatment 
will avoid a recurrence of the blight in the majority of cases. How- 
ever, to cut out these apparently healthy trees is not sufficient; the 
sanitation work must be done as thoroughly as if the trees were dis- 
eased. Even though the merchantable portions are taken out of the 
woods and the tops burned, the unpeeled stumps are very apt to 
become infected, especially if nearby diseased trees have been eject- 
ing ascospores. Four treated spot infections were examined which 
proved this very conclusively. The following facts relative to these 
.spots are interesting: — 

Spot 1. Five infected trees in Huntingdon County were treated 
in April, 1912, by digging up the trees, stumps and all, and burn- 
ing them in an open field. In March, 1913, tlie spot was re-examined 
and three infected trees found. The stumps were peeled and the 
tops burned, but not over the stumps. At the same time all of the 
chestnut trees on a half acre surrounding the spot that were large 
enough for fence posts were cat out, the tops burned and the rest 
of the trees removed. The stumps were left unpeeled and in Janu- 
ary, 1914, 6 new infections were found on small saplings that re- 
mained after the cutting, and all but 4 out of 75 stumps from which 
the bark was not peeled showed pycnidia on the cut surface of the 
wood or bark, pustules in tie dead bark on the side of the stump, 
and usually, mycelium growing downward toward the base of the 
stump through the live bark. 

Spot No. 2. Seven infected trees cut March, 1913; stumps well 
peeled but not burned over. In January, 1914, 9 new infections 
were foiind on adjoining trees and 50 new infections were found 
on the stumps of healthy trees cut in close proximity to the spot 
in March, 1913. These stumps were not peeled and the pustules 
appeared in the bark on the side of the stump, and in many cases 
showed mycelium running through the live bark of the lower part 
of the stump. 

Spot No. S. Seven trees cut June, 1912; stumps peeled and well 
burned. March, 1913, 7 infections were cut out, the stumps poorly 
peeled and not burned. At this time 17 healthy trees were cut 
within a radius of 30 yards and the bark was not peeled from the 
stumps. In January, 1914, no new infections had appeared on any 
of the sui'rounding trees, but 8 of the stumps were infected. 

Spot No. 4- One infection cut July, 1912. Stumps peeled and 
burned. In April, 1913, 16 new infections were found on stumps 
cut at the time the original infection was removed and immediately 





- P'j 








•/■'A " 


SIp 


H i :||:fc^ W 


1' 


^v^Prfe- ■ /"'^-t 


«' ■ t 


np^^^Bi ,- 


■W'^^' v*' t ■*■*' ,''.*' 


i,.,', 


^ i'-^'.'Wg|^ ,, ' ' '" '' 


::*,>> 

m 


^ 


,^^''^||t.-;^l 


1 


^^8H 












' ■ V- 


V^ 


#>v;|»^ 




^^^M 




^ 


7 ■'"■^^ .-IfeJ^^ 


^ 


^^^mm^ 


' 


'■':>^4 


^Hn^^SSfr^ 


^ 


■■■..^jaMMBpBjBBfc'BR'.- 




■ ■ V 


hI^^^^^j 


i 


^MB 




y ' "■ ■ 




! 


M^HI^K 


i* 


..■■■"- • 




1 


*-j|jf ■^ >■ w j<iia^mHKa«j^ajg, 




'?5 




1 


^IK. 


h0v. 


.;■■ -^ :■ 




m 


^^4 


wra 


EKUUKfiiSBSH 


'^;"w-.:.^;f -^i^ 


"X- 


^ 


M^;t',%W-- ^ 




y.y? 


? 

N 


7$n 


^J 


w^- 


^m/^^^^-'M^'- 




■ 1 


'kt 


\.^ 


wsma^iifimm 




M 


% 


W' 




■p^^^™ 


ea 




4 ■ 


■■i. 


^mkc^.^i^s,iM^ 




'j^a^mm^m^-i 








3 



89 

surrounding the infected trees. These stumps were located as fol- 
lows: One stump 3 yards west of center; 3 stumps northwest of 
center (farthest 35 yards) ; 3 stumps north of center (farthest 20 
yards) ; 5 stumps northeast of center (farthest 12 yards) ; 2 stumps 
east of center (farthest 3 yards) ; 2 stumps southeast of center 
(farthest 8 yards) ; these stumps were peeled and not burned over. 
In February, 1914, 4 additional infected stumps were found, the 
farthest being 12 yards from the center. 

East of the advance line sanitation has proved effective in hinder- 
ing the progress of the disease, but not in eradicating it. Inspec- 
tions made of a tract of blighted chestnut at Haverford, Pa., cut 
in 1910 and the stumps peeled, but not burned, showed both in 
1912 and 1918, that only about 20 per cent, of the stumps and 
sprouts were reinfected. On a nearby tract where the trees were 
cut at the same time and stumps left unpeeled, the reinfection was 
approximately 80 per cent. At Hummelstown, Pa., on several acres 
of diseased chestnut, cut in the winter in 1911-12, a portion of the 
stumps were peeled and lightly burned. In the spring of 1913, 80 
per cent, of the peeled stumps and 90 per cent, of the unpeeled 
stumps were reinfected. The reasons for the high per cent, of re- 
infection was the fact that the peeled stumps were not well burned, 
and the nearness of disease on trees in the adjoining woods and on 
the adjoining unpeeled stumps. This is shown by the location of 
the infection on the sprouts as follows: 



90 



■ TABLE VII. 

INFECTION ON SPROUTS AROUND STUMPS OF BLIGHTED 
TREES CUT AT HUMMELSTOWN, PA. 

PEELED STUMPS. 







Infected Sprouts, 






^ 






S 


1 


0) 






9 




C3 




stump Number. 


e 

p. 


o 




s 
o 




u 




a 


■^ 














o 






a 




tl 




■s^ 


« 




Numb 


Infect 


-3 to 





1 

2 

3 

4 

e! '.]'.'.'.'.'.['.[ 

s', '.'..'.'.'.'.'.'.'. 

9 

10 

Avenige, 



42 


5 


11 


2S 








35 


4 


7 


20 


4 


1 


11 





3 


12 


2 





50 





2 


10 





2 


15 


1 


3 


2S 








26.1 


1.2 


2.9 



0.1 



UNPEELED STUMPS. 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6, 

7 

S 

9 

10 

Average, 



15 


4 


3 


24- 





4 


30 


1 





10 





2 


2 








46 





4 


54 


1 


3 


B5 


1 


1 


23 





1 


40 


1 


3 


29.9 


.s 


2.1 



The investigation at Hummelstown shows that there is little 
or no ditference in the number and vigor of the sprouts produced 
by peeled and unpeeled stumps. In many cases, the sprouts reached 
a height of six feet or more in a single year's growth. The sprouts 
from peeled stumps frequently spring from the roots, 2 to 4 inches 
from the stump, and push through three inches or more of soil. 
This will undoubtedly aid in keeping them free from disease, and 
the new growth will be better rooted than ordinary stump sprouts. 







=4-1 I/; 



91 



RECOMMENDATIONS. 



It has been shown that with the less effective methods of cutting 
out spot infections used in the beginning of its work by the Penn- 
sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, the amount of blight 
has been substantially reduced. It is reasonable to suppose that 
much more eflScient results will be obtained by using the methods 
which have been developed by experience, and which are recom- 
mended in this report: 

(1) Cutting out all chestnut trees inside the limits of a spot 
infection, also immediately beyond, regardless of whether or not 
they all show visible signs of the blight. 

(2) Great care in peeling the stumps and in burning or removing 
from the woods all felled portions of the treated trees. 

(3) Thorough disinfection of the peeled stumps, preferably by 
burning. 

(4) A force of well-trained and experienced men to do both the 
scouting and sanitation cutting. 



EEGULATING SHIPMENTS OF CHEST:N^TJT NUE- 

SEEY STOCK. 

The Commission issued the appended ofScial regulations for the 
better protection of buyers of chestnut nursery stock, and to aid 
in the effort to prevent the spread of the chestnut tree bark disease. 
So far as could be learned, the railway and other transportation 
companies generally complied with these instructions, recognizing 
their meaning and importance, knowing that diseased nursery stock 
was a serious menace. 



REGULATIONS RESPECTING CHESTNUT NURSERY STOCK; 
ADOPTED BY THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMIS- 
SION, MARCH 4, 1913. 

Whereas, It is found necessary to make certain regulations in 
order to provide efQcient and practical means for the prevention, 
control, and eradication of the chestnut tree blight; therefore, in 
jjursuance of the powers conferred by Act of Assembly, it is re- 
solved by this Commission that the following regulations be adopted. 



92 

and as occasion may arise, such other and further regulations, and 
the altering or amending of the same, as it may seem necessary. 

Kegulation No. 1. Eaili'oad companies, express companies, and 
other common carriers must not accept for shipment, until further 
notice, any chestnut nursery stock which does not bear the oflScial 
inspection tags of this Commission. Chestnut nursery stock 
shipped from without the State and intended for delivery withta 
the State not being accompanied by an official inspection tag issued 
by the proper authorities of the State or Country wherein such 
shipment originated, certifying apparent freedom from chestnut 
blight, must be held at a convenient place within the State, and 
this Commission immediately notified. Every such shipment must 
be retained in its original package, unopened, and must not be de- 
livered to the consignee until after an examination shall have been 
made by an inspector representing this Commission, and then not 
until the inspector shall have attached thereto the ofiicial inspector's 
tag of this Commission. 

The ofiicial insi)ection tag of the Commission bears the ofQcial 
seal of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, and 
reads as follows: 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 



The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the Chestnut 
Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania. 

CERTIFICATE OF INSPECTION 

This is to Certify that the chestnut nursery stock to which this 
certificate is attached, under my supervision, was carefully ex- 
amined, and at the time of shipment was found to be apparently 
free from any infection by blight caused by the fungus Diaportlie 
parasitica. 

Dated 191 at Pa. 



Inspector. 

For the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. 

Each bundle, bale, or package of chestnut nursery stock shall 
bear the above tag, and in addition each tree shall have attached 
thereto a numbered and signed tag of which the following is a copy: 




Large sprouts growing around creosoted chestnut stumps. 



93 

C0MM02NIWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 



The Commission For tlie Investigation and Control of the Chestnut 
Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania. 
Certificate of Single Tree Inspection. 

Tree Number 

This is to Certify that the chestnut tree to which this tag is at- 
tached, under my supervision, was carefully examined, and at the 
time of shipment was found to be apparently free from any infection 
by blight caused by the fungus Diaporthe parasitica. 

Dated 191 at Pa. 

Inspector. 

Eegulation No. 2. No chestnut tree nursery stock shall be re- 
moved from any nursery or other place where the same may be grow- 
ing, for the purpose of sale or shipment until said trees shall first 
have been inspected by this Commission and the official inspection 
tag attached' thereto. "Removed" is here construed to mean the 
final tying up into an original package, transporting from the 
premises where grown, or offering same to a common carrier for 
shipment. 

Regulation No. 3. All chestnut tree nursery stock intended for 
sale or shipment must first be dipped into an approved fungicide 
prior to delivery or shipment. The official inspection tag will not 
be attached to stock unless first so treated. 

Regulation No. 4. All chestnut tree nursery stock found to be 
infected with the chestnut bark fungus must be immediately de- 
stroyed. This regulation applies to diseased stock found at the 
time of inspection for shipment, and also to inspections in the 
nursery before stock is marketed. 

Regulation No. 5. Nurserymen and common carriers, who, after 
receiving notice of the above regulations, negligently or willfully 
fail to refuse to be governed thereby, will, without further notice, 
subject their chestnut stock and shipments to quarantine, which 
will be maintained by this Commission. 

All correspondence relative to nursery inspection should be ad- 
dressed to Dr. F. D. Heald, Pathologist, Zoology Building, Uni- 
versity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. 

THE AMENDED CHESTNUT TREE BARK DISEASE ACT. 



The work of the Chestnut Blight Commission was suspended not 
because of the lack of a desire to proceed, or lack of oriportunity to 
render most valuable services, but for reasons stated in the letter at 
the beginning of this report. While the legislation recognized the 



94 

need of continuing active work of this character by providing for 
a continuation of the Commission, it did not see its way clear to have 
the work advance with that vigor which the Commission believed 
necessary in order to achieve the most marked success. 

The original Act of Assembly approved June 14, 1911, provided 
that the Commission should continue operations for a period of three 
years from the date of the approval of the Act. This period would 
have expired by limitation, June 14, 1914. To continue the Act 
in force, and to provide for a Commission to take up the work at 
any time, should it be thought in the future desirable to do so, the 
original Act of Assembly was amended by extending the term of 
the original Commission to a period of five years from the date of 
their appointment, and to continue thereafter for so long, as in the 
judgment of the Governor, it might be necessary to have work done 
in accordance with the terms of the law. This makes the Commission 
a continuing one to be revived at the pleasure of the Governor. Sec- 
tion one, of foregoing Act, as amended* by the 1913 Legislature, 
reads as follows : 

"Section 1. Be it enacted, etc.. That a commission, to consist 
of five members, to be appointed and commissioned by .the Governor 
for a period of five years from the date of their appointment, and to 
continue thereafter for such period as, in the judgment of the 
Governor, may be necessary to enable them to complete the work to 
be done under this Act, and to be called The Commission for the In- 
vestigation and Control of the Chestnut-Tree Blight Disease in Penn- 
sylvania, is hereby created; with power to ascertain, determine upon 
and adopt the most efficient and practical means for the prevention, 
control, and eradication of a disease of the chestnut tree, commonly 
known as the chestnut-tree blight disease; and for this purpose, in 
collaboration with the Department of Forestry, or otherwise, to 
conduct scientific investigations into the nature and causes of such 
disease and the means of preventing its introduction, continuance, 
and spread; to establish, regulate, maintain, and enforce quarantine 
against the introduction and spread of such disease; and, from time 
to time, to adopt and prescribe such regulations and methods of pro- 
cedure as to it may seem necessary and proper for carrying into 
effect the purpose of this Act, and exercising the powers and au- 
thority hereby conferred: Provided, That in the work of collabo- 
ration by the Commission with the Department of Forestry, said 
Department may employ such means, and make detail of such men, 
and do such other things, as may seem to be necessary or expedient 
to accomplish the purpose of this Act. Provided further, That if 
the fungus causing the aforesaid disease be found to attack other 
species of trees, such trees shall be deemed to come Avithin the pur- 
view of this act." 

•See p. L. 1913, p. 313. 



Bibliography 
of the 

Chestnut Bark Disease 

By R. KENT BEATTIE, FOREST PATHOLOGIST, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 



(95) 






(96) 



A BIBLIOGEAPHY OF THE CHESTNUT BAEK 

DISEASE.* 



Prepared for the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. 



By R. KENT BEATTIE, Forest Pathologist, 

BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 
OF AGRICULTURE. 



DECEMBER 31, 1913. 



The rapid rise and spread of the Chestnut Bark Disease since its 
introduction into the United States from the Orient, probably in 
the nineties, has called it to the attention both of scientific men 
and the general public. The result of this almost universal notice 
in the eastern states has been the production of numerous articles 
written from many dififerent standpoints. 

It has been the effort in this bibliography to cite all the writings 
of "a scientific or semi-scientiflc nature, with the aim of making a 
good working bibliography of the disease. Since it is manifestly 
impossible for any such bibliography to be complete, the author 
will be glad to have called to his attention any omissions or any 
corrections in the citations here given. 

Because of their importance in the chestnut bark disease problem, 
references to Endothia radicalis and Endothia gyrosa as well as 
those to Endothia •parasitica have been included in this bibliography. 

1. Anderson, H. W. Notes on the genus Endothia. Phytopath- 

ology. Vol. 3, p. 67. February, 1913. 

2. Anderson, P. J. Field Investigations in Pathology. Eeport 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 
to December 31, 1912. p. 4245. 1913. 

3. Anderson, Paul J. Wind Dissemination of the Chestnut 

Blight Organism. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 68. Feb- 
ruary, 1913. 

4. Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. The Chestnut Blight 

Fungus and a Related Saprophyte. Phytopathology. 
Vol. 2, p. 204-210. October, 1912. 

5. Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. Endothia virginiana. 

Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 261-262. December, 1912. 

•Published by permission of the Secretary of Agriculture. 

(97) 



98 

6. Anderson, P. J. and Anderson, H. W. The Chestnut Blight 

Fungus and a Related Saprophyte. Pennsylvania 
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin No. 4. Oc- 
tober, 1913. 
6a. Anonymoiis. Disease of Chestnut. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 
4, p. 320. December, 1906. 

7. Anonymous. A Disease of the Chestnut. Woodland and 

Roadside. Vol. 6, p. 31-32. June, 1907. 

8. Anonymous. A New Tree Disease. The Outlook. Vol. 88, 

p. 621. 21 March, 1908. 

9. Anonymous. Destruction of Chestnut Forests. The Minne- 

sota Forester. Vol. 1, No. 3, p. 31-32. March, 1908. 

10. Anonymous. Are Chestnut Trees Doomed? American Fruits. 

Vol. 8, p. 5. June, 1908. 

11. Anonymous. Editorial. Engineering News. Vol. 60, p. 339. 

24 September, 1908. 

12. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Country Life 

in America. Vol. 15, p. 88. November, 1908. 

13. Anonymous. Hope for the Chestnut. Country Life in 

America. Vol. 15, p. 171. December, 1908. 

14. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 1, p. 136. 

January, 1909. 

15. Anonymous. [The Chestnut Tree Canker.] Torreya. Vol. 

9, p. 214-215. October, 1909. 

16. Anonymous. The New Pine and Chestnut Diseases. Wood- 

land and Roadside. Vol. 8, p. 41. November, 1909. 

17. Anonymous. Tree Diseases. Fourth Annual Report Commis- 

sioner of Forestry, Rhode Island, p. 9-10. 1910. 

18. Anonymous. [No title.] Torreya. Vol. 10, p. 99. April, 

1910. 

19. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 2, p. 251- 

252. September, 1910. 

20. Anonymous. American Forestry Association, Thirtieth An- 

nual Meeting. American Forestry. Vol. 17, p. 99-111. 
February, 1911. 

21. Anonymous. Editorial Appreciation of Pennsylvania's For- 

est Management. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 3. Febru- 
ary, 1911. 

22. Anonymous. The Doom of the Chestnut Tree. Harper's 

Weekly. Vol. 55, p. 15. February, 1911. 

23. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 9, 

p. 353. June, 1911. 

24. Anonymous. Pennsylvania Forestry Legislation in 1911. 

Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 50-51. August, 1911. 



99 

25. Anonymous. [Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Commission.] 

Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 9, p. 518-519. September, 1911. 

26. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. American For- 

estry. Vol. 17, p. 693. November, 1911. 

27. Anonymous. Narrative of the Annual Meeting of the Penn- 

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, 
p. 83. December, 1911. 

28. Anonymous. [Work of the Pennsylvania Commission.] For- 

estry Quarterly. Vol. 9, p. 651. December, 1911. 

29. Anonymous. An Attempt to Suppress the Chestnut Blight. 

Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests. 
Eleventh Eeport. p. 5, 19-20. 1912. 

30. Anonymous. Quaker City News. American Lumberman. No. 

1912. p. 68. 6 January, 1912. 

31. Anonymous. Proposed Forestry Legislative Procedure in the 

Empire State. American Lumberman. No. 1913. p. 65. 
13 January, 1912. 

32. Anonymous. Chestnut Bark Disease. Report Maryland 

State Board of Forestry, 1910-1911. p. 6, 8, 18-21, 30. 
January, 1912. 

33. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight Conference. Forest 

Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 97, 98. February, 1912. 

34. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Ameri- 

can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 136. February, 1912. 

35. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Scientific Ameri- 

can. Vol. 106, p. 105. 3 February, 1912. 

36. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight. American 

Lumberman. No. 1917. p. 43, 10 February, 1912. 

37. Anonymous. Resolutions passed at the Conference Called by 

the Governor of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg, February 
20 and 21, for the consideration of the measures to be 
taken to control the chestnut tree bark disease. Report 
Second Annual Meeting, Northern Nut Growers' Asso- 
ciation, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 122-123. 1912. 

38. Anonymous. Conference of States on Chestnut Tree Blight. 

The Southern Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 857. p. 33-34. 24 
February, 1912. 

39. Anonymous. Conference on the Chestnut Tree Blight. Ameri- 

can Lumberman. No. 1919. p. 73-75. 24 February, 1912. 

40. Anonymous. Harrisburg Chestnut Blight Conference. The 

Southern Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 859, p. 24. 9 March, 
1912. 

41. Anonymous. Cure for the Chestnut Blight. The Southern 

Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 859, p. 46. 9 March, 1912. 



100 

42. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Scientific Ameri- 

can. Vol. 106, p. 241-242. 16 March, 1912. 

43. Anonymous. Three Enemies of Forests. The Southern Lum- 

berman. Vol. 65, No. 860, p. 37. 16 March, 1912. 

44. Anonymous. At Work in Pennsylvania. The Southern Lum- 

berman. Vol. 65, No. 862, p. 27. 30 March, 1912. 

45. Anonymous. Forestry Problems of Three Sections. Ameri- 

can Lumberman. No. 1926, p. 51. 13 April, 1912. 

46. Anonymous. Lumbermen and Forestry. American Forestry. 

Vol. IS, p. 285. April, 1912. 

47. Anonymous. Resolutions of Chestnut Tree Blight Conference. 

Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 116. April, 1912. 

48. Anonymous. The Chestnut Trees Must Go. The Guide to 

Nature. Vol. 4, p. 395-397. April, 1912. 

49. Anonymous. [The Harrisburg Conference.] Phytopathology. 

Vol. 2, p. 91. April, 1912. 

50. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight in Massachusetts. Country 

Life in America. Vol. 22, p. 92, 94. 1 May, 1912. 

51. Anonymous. [News Notes and Map.] American Forestiy, 

Vol. 18, p. 335, 342, 347, 350. May, 1912. 

52. Anonymous. The Chestnut Trees Going. American Forestry, 

Vol. 19, p. 457. July, 1912. 

53. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight Warning. American Forestry, 

Vol. 18, p. 473. July, 1912. 

54. Anonymous. Boy Scouts Aiding. American Forestry. Vol, 

18, p. 541. August, 1912. 

55. Anonymous. Boy Scouts to Save Trees. American Forestry, 

Vol. 18, p. 542. August, 1912. 

56. Anonymous. Narrative of Bushkill Meeting of the Pennsyl 

vania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p 
146. August, 1912. 

57. Anonymous. The Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference, 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 
158. August, 1912. 

58. Anonymous. Progress in Fighting the Chestnut Disease. 

Hardwood Record. Vol. 34, p. 23. 10 September, 1912. 

59. xVjionymous. News Note. Science. N. S. Vol. 36, p. 429. 4 

October, 1912. 

60. Anonymous. The Scientific and Operative Staff of the Penn- 

sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Science. 
N. S. Vol. 36, p. 512. 18 October, 1912. 
60a. Anonymous. The Chestnut Blight Disease. Pennsylvania 
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 1. October, 
1912. 



101 

61. Anonymous. Treatment of Ornamental Chestnut Trees Af- 

fected with the Blight Disease. Pennsylvania Chestnut 
Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 2. October, 1912. 

62. Anonymous. [News Note.] American Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 

811. December, 1912. 

63. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 10, 

p. 742-743. December, 1912. 

64. Anonymous. News and Notes. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 10, 

p. 772. December, 1912. 

65. Anonymous. Phytopathological Notes. Vol. 2, p. 274. De- 

cember, 1912. 

66. Anonymous. Narrative of the Annual Meeting of the Penn- 

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, 
p. 178-179. December, 1912. 

67. Anonymous. Pennsylvania Forestry Association. American 

Forestry. Vol. 19, p. 21. January, 1913. 

68. Anonymous. State News, Pennsylvania. American Forestry. 

Vol. 19, p. 55. January, 1913. 

69. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Journal of the 

Board of Agriculture (London). Vol. 19, p. 848-850. 
January, 1913. 

70. Anonymous. Governor Tener on Forestry. Forest Leaves. 

Vol. 14, p. 2. February, 1913. 

71. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight Bulletins. Forest Leaves. 

Vol. 14, p. 11-12. February, 1913. 

72. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 5, p. 90. 

March, 1913. 

73. Anonymous. Use of Second Growth Chestnut. Lumber World 

Review. Vol. 24, No. 5, p. 24. 10 March, 1913. 

74. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight. American Lumberman. 

No. 1974, p. 58-59. 15 March, 1913. 

75. Anonymous. A Remedy for Chestnut Blight. Hardwood 

Record. Vol. 35, p. 27. 25 March, 1913. 

76. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Bark Disease. The Sci- 

entific American. Vol. 108, p. 314. 5 April, 1913. 

77. Anonymous. [No title.] Arnold Arboretum, Harvard Uni- 

versity. Bulletin of Popular Information. No. 47. 26 
June, 1913. 

78. Anonymous. Using Blight-Killed Chestnut. American For- 

estry. Vol. 19, p. 449. July, 1913. 

79. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree. Methods and Specifications 

for the Utilization of Blighted Chestnut. Pennsylvania 
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 6. 15 Au- 
gust, 1913. 



102 

80. Anonymous. Pennsylvania's Fi^ht Against the Chestnut 

Blight is Suspended. American Forestry. Vol. 19, p. 
556-558. August, 1913. 

81. Anonymous. [No title.] Mycologia. Vol. 5, p. 280. Sep- 

tember, 1913. 

82. Anonymous. [No title.] The Outlook, p. 237. 27 September, 

1913. 

83. Anonymous. [No title.] Forestry quarterly. Vol. 11, p. 449- 

450. September, 1913. 

84. Anonymous. Report of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree 

Blight Commission. Forest Leaves. Vol. 14, p. 77. Oc- 
tober, 1913. 
84a. Anonymous. Conquering the Chestnut Tree Blight. The St. 
Louis Lumberman. Vol. 52, No. 11, p. 59. 1 December, 
1913. 

85. Ashe, W. W. Chestnut in Tennessee. State Geological Sur- 

vey, Tennessee. Bulletin 10, part B, p. 11. January, 
1911. 

86. Baker, H. P. The Chestnut Blight and the Practice of For- 

estry in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight 
Conference Report, p. 137-143. 1912. 

87. Baker, Hugh P. Blight Commission Instruction. American 

Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 267. 1912. 

88. Barney, Chas. T. Report of the Executive Committee. New 

York Zoological Society. Tenth Annual Report. 1905. p. 
40. January, 1906. 

89. Barsali, Egidio. Aggiunte alia Flora Livornese. BuUetino 

della Societa Botanico Italiano. Anno 1904, p. 204. Mag- 
giore, 1904. 

90. Benson, W. M. Chestnut Blight and Its Possible Remedy. 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 
229-233. 1912. 

91. Berlese, A. N. and Peglion, V. Micromiceti Toscani. Nuovo 

Giornale Botanico Italiano. Vol. 24, fasc. 3, p. 122. 
Luglio 1892. 
91a. Berlese, A. N., Saccardo, P. A., and Roumebuere, C. Contribu- 
tions ad Floram Mycologicam Lusitaniae. Revue 
Mycologique. Vol. 11. p. 117-124. July 1889. 

92. Besley, F. W. Mutual Forest Interests of Pennsylvania and 

Maryland. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 39-41. June, 1912. 

93. Bessey, Charles E. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Science. 

N. S. Vol. 37, p. 417. 14 March, 1913. 

94. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 33. 

June, 1911. 



103 

95. B[irkinbiiie], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 49. 

August, 1911. 

96. B[irkiiibine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 113. 

April, 1912. 

97. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 130. 

June, 1912. 

98. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 145. 

August, 1912. 

99. B[itler], F. L. The Chestnut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 

12, p. 148-150. August, 1910. 

100. B[itler], F. L. Narrative of the State College Meeting of the 

Pennsylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 

13, p. 34-37. June, 1911. 

101. Bizzozero, Giacomo. Flora Veneta Crittogamica. Part 1. I 

Funghi. p. 220-221. 1885. 

102. Briosi, Farneti. A Proposito di una nota dell Dott. Lionello 

Petri sulla Moria dei castagni (Mai dell' Inchiostro). 
Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Series V. Rendi- 
conti Classe de scienzi flsiche, matematiche e natural!. 
Vol. 22, ser. 5, 1 sem. fasc. 6, p. 361-366. 16 marzo, 1913. 

103. Britton, W. E. Twelfth Report of the State Entomologist of 

Connecticut. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Sta- 
tion. Report 12, p. 220. 1913. 

104. Brooks, A. B. Fungi That Injure Bark. West Virginia Geo- 

logical Survey. Vol. 5, p. 78-79. 1911. 

105. Brown, Nelson C. Municipal Forestry. American Forestry. 

Vol. 18, p. 781. December, 1912. 

106. Brown, Nelson C. Making the Most of a Bad Situation. The 

Country Gentleman. Vol. 78, p. 289-290. 22 February, 
1913. 
106a. Brunaud, Paul. Contributions a la Flore Mycologique de 
I'Ouest. Annales des Sciences naturelles, La Rochelle. 
p. 108. 1884. 

107. Carleton, M. A. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight Disease 

in Pennsylvania. American Fruit and Nut Journal. Vol. 
6, p. 78-79. September-October, 1912. 

108. Carleton, Mark Alfred. Report of the General Manager for 

the latter half of the year, 1912. Report Pennsylvania 
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to December 
31, 1912. p. 11-18. 1913. 
108a. Cesati and De Notaris. Schema Sferiaceae Italianae. p. 207, 
240. 1863. 

109. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease, Diaporthe parasitica 

Murrill. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station 
Report 1907. p. 345-346. May, 1908. 



104 

110. Clinton, G. P. The Chestnut Bark Disease, Diaporthe parasi- 

tica Murrill. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Sta- 
tion Eeport 1908. p. 879-890. July, 1909. 

111. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease. Connecticut Agricul- 

tural Experiment Station Eeport 1909-1910. p. 716-717, 
725. 1910. 

112. Clinton, G. P. Some Pacts and Theories Concerning Chestnut 

Blight. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Re- 
port, p. 75-83. 1912. 

113. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Blight Fungus and Its Allies. Phyto- 

pathology. Vol. 2, p. 265-269. December, 1912. 

114. Clinton, G. P. The Relationships of the Chestnut Blight 

Fungus. Science. N. S. Vol. 36, p. 907-914. 27 December, 
1912. 

115. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease. Connecticut Agricul- 

tural Experiment Station Report 1912. p. 359-453. May, 
1913. 

116. Clinton, G. P. and Spring, S. N. Chestnut Blight Situation 

in Connecticut. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Confer- 
ence Report, p. 154-157. 1912. 

117. Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Proceed- 

ings Second Annual Meeting Northern Nut Growers' 
Association, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 37-49. 1912. 

118. Collins, J. Franklin. Treatment of Orchard and Ornamental 

Trees. American Lumberman. No. 1920. p. 34. 2 
March, 1912. 

119. Collins, J. Franklin. Some Observations on Experiments with 

the Chestnut Bark Disease. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 
97. April, 1912. 

120. Collins, J. Franklin. Address [on the Chestnut Bark Disease]. 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 28- 
39. 1912. 

121. Collins, J. Franklin. Treatment of Orchard and Ornamental 

Trees. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, 
p. 59-69. 1912. 

122. Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark Disease on Chestnut 

Fruits. Science. N. S. Vol. 38, p. 857-858. 12 Decem- 
ber, 1913. 

123. Conklin, Robert S. The Chestnut Blight. Report Pennsyl- 

vania Department of Forestry 1908-1909. p. 59-61. 1910. 

124. Cook, A. J. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Monthly Bulletin 

State Commissioner of Horticulture, California. Vol. 1, 
p. 314. June, 1912. 

125. Cook, Melville Thurston and Taubenhaus, J. J. The Relation 

of Parasitic Fungi to the Contents of the Cells of the 



105 

Host Plants (T. The Toxicity of Tannin). Delaware 
Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 91, p. 21. 1 
February, 1911. 

126. Cook, Mel. T. Diseases of Shade and Forest Trees. The Plant- 

ing and Care of Shade Trees. Forest Park Reservation 
Commission of New Jersey, p. 101-103. 1912. 

127. Copp, Gr. G. A Disease Which Threatens the American Chest- 

nut Tree. Scientific American. Vol. 95, p. 451. 15 De- 
cember, 1906. 

128. Craig, John. Nut Culture from the Northern Standpoint. The 

Western New York Horticultural Society. Proceedings 
of the fifty-seventh annual meeting, p. 100. 24-26 Janu- 
ary, 1912. 

129. Craighead, F. C. Insects Contributing to the Control of the 

Chestnut Blight Disease. Science. Vol. 36, p. 825. 13 
December, 1912. 

130. Currey, Frederick. Sphaeria (Diatrype) radicalis Fr. in 

Synopsis of the Fructification of the Compound Sphaeriae 
of the Hookerian Herbarium. The Transactions of the 
Linnaean Society of London. Vol. 22, p. 272. 1859. 
130a. Curtis, M. A. Geological and Na'tural History Survey of 
North Carolina. Botany, p. 143. 1867. 

131. Davis, Nelson F. Chestnut Culture. Pennsylvania Chestnut 

Blight Conference Report, p. 83-99. 1912. 

132. Davis, William T. Note on the Chestnut Fungus. Proceed- 

ings Staten Island Association of Arts and Sciences. Vol. 
2, B. p. 128-129. July, 1908— February, 1909. 

133. Deam, Charles C. Trees of Indiana. State Board of Forestry, 

Indiana, eleventh annual report. 1911. p. 171. 1912. 

134. Deming, W. C. Beginning with Nuts. The Northern Nut 

Growers' Association. Circular No. 4. April, 1913. 

135. Deming, W. C. and Huson, Calvin J. (Correspondence on the 

Chestnut Tree Bark Disease) . Report Second annual meet- 
ing. Northern Nut Growers' Association, December 14 and 
15, 1911. p. 119-121. 1912. 
135a. De Notaris. Sferiaceae Italianae. Vol. 1, p. 9. 1863. 

136. Detwiler, S. B. The Chestnut Blight. Third Annual Meeting 

Montgomery County Horticultural Association, Norris- 
town. Pa. September, 1911. 

137. Detwiler, S. B. The Progress of the Fight Against the Chest- 

nut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 88-89. December, 
1911. 

138. Detwiler, S. B. The Pennsylvania Programme. Pennsylvania 

Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 129-136. 1912. 



106 

139. Detwiler, S. B. The Spread of the Chestnut Blight. The Coun- 

try Gentleman. Vol. 77, p. 6. 9 March, 1912. 

140. Detwiler, S. B. The War on the Chestnut Blight. The Coun- 

try Gentleman. Vol. 77, p. 8, 27. 30 March, 1912. 

UOa. Detwiler, S. B. The Control of the Chestnut Tree Bark Dis- 
ease. Proceedings of the Society of American Foresters. 
Vol. 7, p. 131. 4 April, 1912. 

140b. Detwiler, S. B. The Farmer and the Chestnut Blight. An- 
nual Eeport Bradford County Farmers' Annual Institute, 
Towanda, Pa. 22 May, 1912. 

141. Detwiler, S. B. Some Benefits of the Chestnut Blight. Forest 

Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 162-165. October, 1912. 

142. Detwiler, Samuel B. Eeport of the General Superintendent. 

Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, 
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 19-34. 1913. 

143. Detwiler, S. B. The Problem of the Chestnut Blight. The 

New York Lumber Trade Journal. Vol. 54, No. 643, p. 
34. 1 April, 1913. 

144. Detwiler, S. B. The Chestnut Blight and its Remedy. Penn- 

sylvania Arbor Day Manual, 1913. p. 170-179. 1913. 
144a. Detwiler, S. B. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Pennsylvania 
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Unnumbered circular. 
No date. 

145. Detwiler, S. B. and Besley, F. W. The Pennsylvania Chestnut 

Blight Conference. 1912. 

146. Ducomet, M . V. Contribution a 1' 6tude des maladies du 

chataignier. Association Francaise pour I'Avaucement 
des Sciences. Comptes Rendus 40 Session, 1911. p. 502- 
506. 1912. 

147. Duggar, B. M. Fungous Diseases of Plants, p. 281-282. 1909. 

148. Editors, Country Life in America. Wanted: A Remedy. Coun- 

try Life in America. Vol. 15, p. 45. November, 1908. 

149. Elliott, Simon B. The Important Timber Trees of the United 

States, p. 290. 1912. 

150. Ellis, J. B. and Everhart, B. M. Endothia gyrosa (Schw.) The 

North American Pyrenomycetes. p. 552. pi. 36. 1892. 
150a. Elwes, Henry John and Henry, Augustine. The Trees of Great 
Britain and Ireland. Vol. 4, p. 858. 1909. 

151. Fairchild, David. The Discovery of the Chestnut Bark Dis- 

ease in China. Science N. S. Vol. 38, p. 297-299. 29 
August, 1913. 

152. Farlow, W. G. [No title]. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight 

Conference Report, p. 70-75. 1912. 

153. Farlow, W. G. The Fungus of the Chestnut Tree Blight. Sci- 

ence. N. S. Vol. 35, p. 717-722. 10 May, 1912. 



107 

154. Fisher, A. K. [No title.] Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Con- 

ference Eeport. p. 103-104. 1912. 

155. Francis, Thomas E. Field Work of the Chestnut Tree Blight 

Commission. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference 
Eeport. p. 233-235. 1912. 

156. Fries, Elia. Eclogae Fungorum. Linnaea. Bd. 5, p. 541. 1830. 

157. Fries, Elia. Elenchus Fungorum. Vol. 2, p. 73. 1828. 
157a. Fries, Elia. Endothia. Summa Vegetabilium Scandinaviae. 

Vol. 2, p. 385. 1849. 

158. Frothingham, Earl H. Second-Growth Hardwoods in Con- 

necticut. United States Department of Agriculture For- 
est Service. Bulletin 96. p. 44, 56. 1912. 
158a. Fuckel. Endothia gyrosum (Tul.) Symbolae Mycologicae. 
p. 226. 1869. 

159. FuUerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Fatal Chest- 

nut Disease. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 1, No. 24, 
p. 1-2. 17 June, 1908. 

160. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Doomed 

Chestnut Trees. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 2, No. 1, 
p. 7-8. 29 July, 1908. 

161. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Japanese, 

Spanish and native Chestnuts. Long Island Agronomist. 
Vol. 2, No. 9, p. 2. 18 November, 1908. 

162. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Chestnut 

Blight. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 3, No. 3, p. 2. 25 
August, 1909. 

163. Fulton, H. E. Recent Notes on the Chestnut Bark Disease. 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Eeport. p. 
48-56. 1912. 

164. Fulton, H. E. Chestnut Bark Disease. Penn State Parmer. 

Vol. 5, p. 151-155. May, 1912. 

165. Fulton, H. E. The Chestnut Tree Bark Disease. North Caro- 

lina Agricultural Experiment Station. Press Bulletin 
No. 26. 10 July, 1913. 

165a. Gardner, M. W. Longevity of pycnospores of the chestnut 
blight fungus in soil. Abstracts of papers to be given 
at the fifth annual meeting of the American Phytopatho- 
logical Society in the State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga., De- 
cember 30, 1913, to January 2, 1914. p. 14. 16 December, 
1913. 

1.66. Gaskill, Alfred. Eeport of the Forester. The Chestnut Blight. 
Third Annual Eeport Forest Park Eeservation Commis- 
sion of New Jersey, p. 45-46. 1907. 



108 

167. Gaskill, Alfred. Eeport of the Forester. The Chestnut Blight 

or Canker. Fourth Annual Eeport Forest Park Reserva- 
tion Commission of New Jersey, p. 33. 1908. 

168. GaskUl, Alfred. Chestnut Canker. Fifth Annual Report of 

the Forest Park Reservation Commission of New Jersey, 
p. 48. 1909. 

169. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Blight. Sixth Annual Report of 

the Forest Park Reservation Commission of New Jersey, 
p. 69. 1910. 

170. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Blight. Seventh Annual Report of 

the Forest Park Reservation Commission of New Jersey, 
p. 86-87. 1911. 

171. GaskiU, Alfred. Report of the State Forester — Chestnut 

Blight. Eighth Annual Report Forest Park Reservation 
Commission of New Jersey, p. 75-76. 1913. 

172. Gaylord, F. A. Forestry and Forest Resources in New York. 

New York State Conservation Commission. Division of 
Lands and Forests. Bulletin 1, p. 25. 1912. 

173. Giddings, N. J. The Chestnut Bark Disease. West Virginia 

Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 137. March, 
1912. 

174. Gravatt, Flippo. The Chestnut Bark Disease in Virginia. 

The Southern Planter. Vol. 7, No. 3, p. 295. March, 
1913. 

175. Graves, Arthur H. The Chestnut Bark Disease in Massa- 

chusetts. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 99. April, 1912. 

176. Griggs, Robert F. Observations on the geographical composi- 

tion of the Sugar Grove Flora. Bulletin Torrey Botani- 
cal Club. Vol. 40, p. 488. September, 1913. 

177. Gulliver, F. P. Report of the Geographer. Report Pennsyl- 

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De- 
cember 31, 1912. p. .^2-53. 1913. 

178. Halsted, Byron D. Fungi of Native and Shade Trees. Fourth 

Annual Report of the Forest Park Reservation Commis- 
sion of New Jersey, p. 108. 1908. 

179. Hawley, Ralph C. and Hawes, Austin F. Forestry ia New 

England, p. 62, 94, 118-122. .341, 355, 359, 372. 1912. 

180. Heald, F. D. Pathological Investigations. Report Pennsyl- 

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De- 
cember 31, 1912. p. 40-42. 1913. 

181. Heald, F. D. The Dissemination of Fungi Causing Disease. 

Transactions of the American Microscopical Society. Vol. 
32, p. 5-30. January, 1913, 



109 

182. Heald, F. D. The Symptoms of Chestnut Tree Blight and a 

Brief Description of the Fungus. Pennsylvania Chest- 
nut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin No. 5. 15 May, 1913. 

183. Heald, F. D. A Method of Determining in Analytic Work 

Whether Colonies of the Chestnut Blight Fungus Origi- 
nate from Pycnospores or Ascospores. Mycologia. Vol. 
5, p. 274-277. September, 1913. 

184. Heald, F. D. and Gardner, M. W. Preliminary Note on the 

Relative Prevalence of Pycnospores and Ascospores of the 
Chestnut Blight Fungus During the Winter. Science. N. 
S. Vol. 37, p. 916-917. June, 1913. 

181a. Heald, F. D. and Gardner, M. W. The Relative Prevalence of 
Pycnospores and Ascospores of the Chestnut Blight Fun- 
gus During the Winter. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 296- 
305. December, 1913. 

184b. Heald, F. D., Gardner, M. W. and Studhalter, R. A. Wind 
Dissemination of ascospores of the chestnut blight fungus. 
* Abstracts of papers to be given at the fifth annual meet- 

ing of the American Phytopathological Society in the 
State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga., December 30, 1913, to Janu- 
ary 2, 1914. p. 13-14. 16 December, 1913. 

185. Heald, F. D. and Studhalter, R. A. Preliminary Note on Birds 

as Carriers of the Chestnut Blight Fungus. Science N. 
S. Vol. 38, p. 278-280. 22 August, 1913. 

186. Henry, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en 

Europe. Revue des Eaux et Forets. Vol. 48, p. 422-432. 
1909. 

187. Henry, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en 

Europe. Annates de la Science Agronomique. 3 Ser. 4 
ann. Tome 1, p. 241-247. 1909. 

188. Henry, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en 

Europe. Bulletin des Stances de la Soci6t6 de Sciences de 
Nancy. 3 Ser. X. p. 72-82. March-April, 1909. 

189. Hicks, Isaac, and Son. Trees for Long Island, p. 14. 1908. 

190. Hirst, E. C. New Hampshire Forest Commission Biennial 

Report, 1911-1912. p. 63-65. November, 1912. 
190a. Hitchcock, Edward. A Catalogue of Plants growing without 
cultivation in the vicinity of Amherst College, p. 63. 1829. 

191. Hitchcock, Edward. Catalogue of Plants Growing Without 

Cultivation. Massachusetts Geological Survey. Report 
on the Geology, Mineralogy, Botany and Zoology of 
Massachusetts, p. 647. 1833. 

192. Hodson, E. R. Extent and Importance of the Chestnut Bark 

Disease. Forest Service. (Unnumbered circular). 21 
October, 19Q8, 



110 

193. Hohnel, Fr. v. Fragmente zur Mycologie. Sitzungsberichte 

der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathe- 
matisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse. Vienna. Bd. 118. 
Abt. 1. Halbband 2. p. 1479-U81. November, 1909. 

194. HoUick, Artbur L. Tbe Chestnut Disease on Staten Island. 

Proceedings Staten Island Association of Arts and Sci- 
ences. Vol. 2, p. 125-127. July, 1908— February, 1909. 

195. Holmes, J. S. The Chestnut Bark Disease which threatens 

North Carolina. Proceedings of the Second Annual Con- 
vention of the North Carolina Forestry Association at 
Raleigh, N. C, 21 February, 1912. North Carolina Geo- 
logical and Economic Survey. Economic Paper No. 25, 
p. 12-15. 1912. 

196. Holmes, J. S. Scouting for Chestnut Blight in North Caro- 

lina. North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey. 
Press Bulletin No. 88. 24 October, 1912. 

197. Hoover, T. L. [No. title]. American Forestry. Vol. 17, p. 

693-694. November, 1911. 

198. Hoover, T. L. and Detwiler, S. B. Coppice Growth and the 

Chestnut Tree Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 102- 
103. February, 1912. 

199. Hopkins, A. D. [No title]. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight 

Conference Report, p. 180-184. 1912. 

200. Hopkins, A. D. Relation of Insects to the Death of Chestnut 

Trees. American Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 221. April, 1912. 

201. Hornor, C. B. A Way Around the Chestnut Blight. House 

and Garden. Vol. 16, p. 119. September, 1909. 

202. Jordan, W. H. Director's Report for 1912. New York (Ge- 

neva) Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 356, p. 
559. December, 1912. 

203. Kittredge, J., Jr. Notes on the Chestnut Bark Disease (Dia- 

porthe parasitica Murrill) in Petersham, Massachusetts. 
Bulletin of the Harvard Forestry Club. Vol. 2, p. 13-22, 
1913. 
203a. Lamy, C. E. Sphaeria radicalis. Simples apercu sur les PI. 
Crypt, et Agam. du Dept. Haute Vienne. Compt. rend, 
d. 1. 26 Session Cong. Sciences de France, Limoges. Sep- 
tember, 1859. p. 31. 1860. 

204. Lindau, G. Endothia, in Engler und Prantl. Die Natuerlichen 

Pflanzenfamilien. 1 Teil. 1 Abteilung. p. 478. Febru- 
ary, 1897. 

205. M , W. Save your Chestnut Trees. Country Life 

in America. Vol. 17, p. 444. February, 1910. 

206. Manson, Marsden. Chestnut Tree Disease, American Fores- 

try. Vol. 18. p. 286. April, 1912, 



Ill 

207. Manson, Marsden. The Chestnut Tree Disease. Science. N. S. 

vol. 35. p. 269, 270. 16 February, 1912. 

208. Marlatt, Charles L. Pests and Parasites. National Geographic 

Magazine. Vol. 17, p. 343-345. April, 1911. 

209. Massee, George. American Chestnut Disease. Diseases of 

Cultivated Plants and Trees, p. 210-211. 1910. 

210. McCarthy, J. E. Chestnut Tree Blight in Pennsylvania. 

American Lumberman. No. 1926, p. 51. 13 April, 1912. 

211. Merkel, Herman W. A Deadly Fungus on the American 

Chestnut. Tenth Annual Report New York Zoological 
Society, 1905. p. 97-103. January, 1906. 

212. Metcalf, Haven. The Immunity of the Japanese Chestnut to 

the Bark Disease. United States Department of Agricul- 
ture, Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 121, part vi., p. 
3-4. 10 February, 1908. 
212a. Metcalf, Haven. Bark Disease of the Chestnut. The Nut- 
Grower. Vol. 6, No. 7, p. 1-3, 5. February, 1908. 

213. Metcalf, Haven. The Bark Disease of the Chestnut. Ameri- 

can Fruits. Vol. 8, No. 3, p. 9, 20. March, 1908. 

214. Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of Ornamental Trees. United 

States Department of Agriculture Yearbook, 1907. p. 
483-494. 27 July, 1908. 

215. Metcalf, Haven. The Present Status of the Bark Disease of 

the Chestnut. Science, N. S. Vol. 31, p. 239. 11 February, 
1910. 

216. Metcalf, Haven. Phytopathological Notes. Phytopathology. 

Vol. 2, p. 91. April, 1912. 

217. Metcalf, Haven. Further Notes on the Chestnut Bark Dis- 

ease. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 97. April, 1912. 

218. Metcalf, Haven. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Journal of 

Economic Entomology. Vol. 5, p. 222-226. April, 1912. 

219. Metcalf, Haven. Phytopathological Notes. Phytopathology. 

Vol. 2, p. 128. June, 1912. 

220. Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of the Chestnut and Other Trees. 

Transactions of the Massachusetts Horticultural Society. 
Part 1, p. 69-95. August, 1912. 

221. Metcalf, Haven. The Chestnut Bark Disease. United States 

Department of Agriculture Yearbook, 1912. p. 363-372. 
5 June, 1913. 

222. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Present Status 

of the Chestnut Bark Disease. United States Department 
of Agriculture. Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 141. 
Part v., p. 45-53. 30 August, 1909. 

223. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark 

Disease. Science. N. S. Vol. 31, p. 748. 13 May, 1910. 



112 

224. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. Further Notes on 

the Bark Diseases of the Chestnut. Phytopathology. Vol. 
1, p. 106. June, 1911. 

225. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Control of the 

Chestnut Bark Disease. United States Department of 
Agriculture. Farmers' Bulletin 467. 1911. 

226. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The present known 

Distribution of the Chestnut Bark Disease. Science. N. 
S. Vol. 35, p. 420. March, 1912. 

227. Mickleborough, John. The Blight on Chestnut Trees. Con- 

servation. Vol. 14, p. 585-588. November, 1908. 

228. Mickleborough, John. A Keport on the Chestnut Tree Blight, 

the fungus DlaportJie parasitica Murrill. Pennsylvania 
Department of Forestry, unnumbered bulletin. May, 1909. 

229. Millard, Bailey. The Passing of the Chestnut Tree. Munsey's 

Magazine. Vol. 43, p. 758-765. September, 1910. 

230. Montague, C. Notice sur les Plantes Cryptogames recemment 

decouvertes en France, contenant aussi I'indication precise 
des localit^s de quelques especes les plus rares de la Flore 

francaise. Annates des Sciences Naturelles. 2 Ser. Tome 

1, p. 295. 1834. 

231. Montague, C. Plantes cellulaires exotiques. Cryptogamarum 

Guianensium. Annates des Sciences Naturelles. Botani- 
que. 2 Ser. Tome 13, p. 359. 1840. 

232. Montague, C. Cryptogamia guyanensis. Annates des Sciences 

naturelles. Botanique. 4 Ser. Tome 3, p. 123-124. 1855. 

233. Moon, F. F. Eeport on the Highlands of the Hudson Forest 

Reservation. Fifteenth annual report of the Forest, Fish 
and Game Commissioner of New York. p. 226. 1909. 

234. Morris, Robert T. Chestnut Timber Going to Waste. Con- 

servation. Vol. 15, p. 226. April, 1909. 

235. Morris, Robert T. Notes on Immunity of Chestnuts From the 

Bark Disease at Stamford, Connecticut. Proceedings of 
the Second Meeting of the Northern Fruit Growers' Asso- 
ciation. 14 December, 1911. 

236. Mowry, Jesse B. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Office of the 

Commissioner of Forestry of Rhode Island. Leaflet No. 
6. 10 June, 1911. 

237. Murdoch, John, Jr. Chestnut, Its Market in Massachusetts. 

Massachusetts State Forester. Unnumbered bulletin. 
1912. 

238. Murrill, W. A. A Serious Chestnut Disease. Journal of the 

New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 7, p. 143-153. June, 
1906. 



113 

239. Murrill, W. A. Further Remarks on a Serious Chestnut Dis- 

ease. Journal of the New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 
7, p. 203-211. 1906. 

240. Murrill, W. A. A New Chestnut Disease. Torreya. Vol. 6, 

p. 186-189. September, 1906. 

241. Murrill, W. A. The Spread of the Chestnut Disease. Journal 

of the New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 9, p. 23-30. Feb- 
ruary, 1908. 

242. Murrill, W. A. The Chestnut Canker. Torreya. Vol. 8, p. 

111-112. May, 1908. 

243. Murrill, W. A. Collecting Fungi at Biltmore. Journal of the 

New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 9, p. 135-141. August, 
1908. 

244. Murrill, W. A. The Passing of the Chestnut Tree. Suburban 

Life. Vol. 8, p. 26-27. January, 1909. 

245. Murrill, W. A. The Chestnut Canker Convention. Journal of 

the New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 13, p. 41-44. March, 
1912. 

246. Nash, George V. A Visit to Letchworth Park. Torreya. Vol. 

7, p. 212. November, 1907. 
246a. Otis, Charles Herbert. Michigan Trees. University of Michi- 
gan, University Bulletin. New Series. Vol. 14, No. 16, 
p. 95. March, 1913. 

247. Oudemans, C. A. J. A. Revision des Champignons taut su- 

p^rieurs qu' inf^rieurs trouv6s jusqu'tl ce jour les Pay- 
Bas. Vol. 2, p. 204. Maart, 1897. 

248. Oudemans, C. A. J. A. Revisio Pyrenomycetum in regno Ba- 

tavorum hucusque detectonim. p. 127. 1884. 

249. Pantanelli, E. Sul paratismo di Diaporthe parasitica Murrill 

per il castagno. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. 
Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, matematiche 
e naturali. Vol. 20, 1 sem. fasc. 5, p. 366-372. 5 marzo, 
1911. 

250. Pantanelli, E. Su la supposta origine europea del cancro 

americano del castagno. Atti della Reale Accademia dei 
Lincei. Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, 
matematiche e naturali. Vol. 21. fasc. 12, 2 sem., p. 869- 
875. 15 decembre, 1912. 

251. Pearson, R. A. Address as Chairman. Pennsylvania Chestnut 

Blight Conference Report, p. 19-20. 1912. 
251a. Peck, Charles H. Endothia gyrosa. Twenty-fourth Report 
of the New York State Museum, p. 99. 1872. 

252. Peck, Charles H. Oastanea dentata (Marsh) Borkh. Report 

State Botanist New York, Museum Bulletin No. 131, p. 
29. 1 July, 1909, 



114 

253. Peck, 0. H. Valsonectria parasitica (Murrill) Eehm. Eeport 

of the State Botanist of New York. Museum Bulletin No. 
150, p. 49. 15 May, 1911. 

254. Peck, 0. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York, 1910. 

Museum Bulletin No. 150, p. 7. 15 May, 1911. 

255. Peck, O. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York, 1911. 

Museum Bulletin No. 157, p. 7. 1 March, 1912. 

256. Peck, C. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York. Mu- 

seum Bulletin No. 158. p. 51. 1 April, 1912. 

257. Peck, C. H. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Report of the State 

Botanist of New York. Museum Bulletin No. 167, p. 7. 1 
September, 1913. 

258. Perry, E. F. [No title]. American Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 204. 

March, 1912. 

258a. Peirce, Harold. (Chestnut Tree Blight.) Main Line Citi- 
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. 1 August, 1910. 

258b. Peirce, Harold. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Main Line Citi- 
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. September, 
1910. 

258c. Peirce, Harold, et al. Chestnut Tree Blight. Main Line Citi- 
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. No date. 

259. Petri, L. Richerche sulla malattia del castagno delta dell' 

inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Series 
V. Rendiconti Glasse di scienzi flsiche, matematiche e 
naturali. Vol. 21. 2 sem. fasc. 11, p. 775-781. 1 decembre, 
1912. 

260. Petri, L. Ulteriori ricerche sulla malattia del castagno delta 

dell' inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. 

Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, mate- 
matiche e naturali. Vol. 21, 2 sem. fasc. 12, p. 863-869. 

15 decembre, 1912. 

261. Petri, L. Considerazioni critiche sulla malattia del castagno 

delta deir inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei 
Lincei. Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, 
matematiche e naturali. Vol. 22, 1 sem. fasc. 7, p. 464- 
468. 6 aprile, 1913. 

262. Petri, L. Sopra una nuova specie di Endothia, E. pseiidoradi- 

calis. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Series V. 
Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, matematiche e natu- 
rali. Vol. 22, 1 sem. fasc. 9, p. 653-658. 1913. 

263. Pettis, 0. R. Chestnut Bark Disease. Report of the Superin- 

tendent of Forests. First Annual Report of the Con- 
servation Commission of New York. p. 50. 1912. 



11?. 

263a. Pettis, C. E. Chestnut Bark Disease. Second Annual Report 
of the Conservation Commission (New York), 1912. p. 98. 
1913. 

264. Pierce, Eoy G. Eeport of the Tree Surgeon. Eeport Pennsyl- 

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De- 
cember 31, 1912. p. 51. 1913. 

265. Pierce, Eoy G. Some Problems in the Treatment of Diseased 

Chestnut Trees. Eeport of the Proceedings at the Third 
Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut Growers Associa- 
tion, December IS and 19, 1912. p. 44-59. 1913. 

266. Pierce, Eoy G. Treatment of Ornamental or Cultivated Chest- 

nut Trees. The American City. Vol. 8, p. 157-159. Feb- 
ruary, 1913. 

267. Pierce, Eoy G. Saving Chestnut Trees. American Forestry. 

Vol. 19, p. 248-251. April, 1913. 

268. Pierson, Albert H. Wood-Using Industries of Connecticut. 

Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 
174, p. 16. January, 1913. 

269. Eane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Sixth Annual Ee- 

port of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 58. 1909. 

270. Eane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Seventh Annual 

Eeport of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 58. 
January, 1911. 

271. Eane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. State Forester's 

Office, Massachusetts. 1911. 

272. Eane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Eighth Annual Ee- 

port of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 27-28. 
1912. 

273. Eane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. State Forester of 

Massachusetts. [Unnumbered Bulletin]. 1912. 

274. Eankin, W. Howard. How Further Eesearch May Increase 

the Efficiency of the Control of the Chestnut Bark Dis- 
ease. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Eeport. 
p. 46-48. 1912. 

275. Eankin, W. H. The Chestnut Tree Canker Disease. Phytopath- 

ology. Vol. 2, p. 99. April, 1912. 

276. Eankin, W. H. Some Field Experiments with the Chestnut 

Canker Fungus. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 73. Febru- 
ary, 1913. 

277. Eecord, S. J. Use of Blight-Killed Chestnut. Hardwood 

Eecord. Vol. 34, p. 30-32. 10 September, 1912. 

278. Eeed, C. A. Nut Growing in the Northern States. Proceed- 

ings of the Second Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut 
Growers' Association, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 51, 
54. 1912. 



itc 

279. Reed, C. A. Nut Growing in the Northern States. National 

Nurseryman. Vol. 20, p. 134-136. April, 1912. 

280. Eeed, O. A. A 1912 Review of the Nut Situation in the North. 

Report of the Proceedings at the Third Annual Meeting of 
the Northern Nut Growers Association, December 18 and 
19, 1912. p. 91-93. 1913. 

281. Rehm. Ascomycetes exs. Fasc. 39. Annales Mycologici. Vol. 

5, p. 210. June, 1907. 

282. Riley, Phil N. What Shall We Do About the Chestnut Blight? 

Country Life in America. Vol. 20, p. 88, 90, 92, 94. 1 
September, 1911. 

283. Ridsdale, Percival S. The Chestnut Blight Campaign. Ameri- 

can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 178-180. March, 1912. 

284. Rockey, Keller E. Recent Work on the Chestnut Blight. Re- 

port of the Proceedings at the Third Annual Meeting of 
the Northern Nut Growers' Association, December 18 and 
19, 1912. p. 37-59. 1913. 

285. Rockey, Keller E. Report of Demonstration Work. Report 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 — 
December 31, 1912. p. 59-61. 1913. 

286. Rollins, Montgomery. Help Save the Chestnut Trees. The So- 

ciety for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests. [Un- 
numbered circular]. [No date]. 

287. Rothrock, J. T. Report of the General Secretary of the Penn- 

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 12, 
p. 181-183. December, 1910. 

288. Rudolphi, Fr. Plantarum vel Novarum vel Minus Cognitarum 

Descriptiones. Linnaea. Bd. 4, p. 393. 1829. 

289. Ruggles, A. G. Investigations of Insects Associated with the 

Chestnut Blight. Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree 
Blight Commission, July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 48- 
49. 1913. 

290. Ruggles, A. G. Notes ou a Chestnut Tree Insect. Science. N. 

S. Vol. 38, p. 852. 12 December, 1913. 

291. Ruhland, W. Untersuchungen zu eiuer Morphologie der stroma- 

bildene Sphaeriales. Hedwigia. Bd. 39. p. 32-34. 1900. 

292. Rumbold, Caroline. A new Record of a Chestnut Tree Disease 

in Mississippi. Science. N. S. Vol. 34, p. 917. December, 
1911. 

293. Rumbold, Caroline. The Possibility of a Medicinal Remedy 

for Chestnut Blight. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Con- 
ference Report, p. 57-58. 1912. 

294. Rumbold, Caroline. Summer and Fall Observations on the 

Growth of the Chestnut Bark Disease in Pennsylvania. 
Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 100. AprU, 1912. 



117 

295. Rumbold, Caroline. Report of the Physiologist. Report Penn- 

sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De- 
cember 31, 1912. p. 45-47. 1913. 
295a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Mycologiae Venetae Speci- 
men, p. 146-147. tab. 14, fig. 63-65. 1873. 

296. Saccardo, P. A. Fungi Gallici. Michelia Commentarium My- 

cologicum. Vol. 2, p. 59. 25 April, 1880. 
296a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Fungi gallici. ser IV. 
Michelia Commentarium Mycologicum. Vol. 2, p. 583. 
1882. 

297. Saccardo, P. A. Fungi Gallici. Michelia Commentarium My 

cologicum. Vol. 2, p. 596. 1 December, 1882. 
297a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Sylloge Fungorum. Vol. 

1, p. 601. 1882. 
297b. Saccai'do, P. A. Endothia. Genera Pyrenomyceten schematice 

delineata, tab. 6, fig. 6. November, 1883. 
297c. Saccardo, P. A. Florula Mycologica Lusitanica. Boletim da 

Sociedade Broteriana. Vol. 11, p. 18, 118. 1892-1893. 
297d. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Sylloge Fungorum. Vol. 

19. p. 647. 1910. 

298. Sargent, Winthrop. Report of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree 

Blight Commission, July 1 to December 31, 1912. 1913. 

299. Schaefifer, Nathan C. Autumn Arbor Day. Forest Leaves. 

Vol. 13, p. 162. October, 1912. 
800. Schock, Oliver D. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight. Ameri- 
can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 575. September, 1912. 

301. Schock, Oliver D. Chestnut Cultivation. The Forecast. Vol. 

4, p. 213-217. November, 1912. 

302. Schock, Oliver D. The Blight iu Pennsylvania. American 

Forestry. Vol 19, p. 962-966. December, 1913. 
802a. Schweinitz, Ludovici Davidis de. Synopsis Fungorum in 

America Boreali media degeutium. 15 April, 1881. 
302b. Schweinitz, Ludovici Davidis de. Synopsis Fungorum Caro- 

linae Superioris. p. 3. No date. 
308. Selby, A. D. Brief Handbook of the Diseases of Ohio. Ohio 

Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 214. p. 387 

1910. 

304. Selby, A. D. Dressings for Pruning Wounds of Trees. Ohio 

Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular 126. 27 May, 
1912. 

305. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Bark Fungus, Diaporthe parasitica. 

Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 88-89. April, 1912. 

306. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Blight Fungus. Phytopathology. 

Vol. 2, p. 211-212. October, 1912. 



118 

307. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Bark Fungus. Centralblatt ftir 

Bakteriologie, Parasitenkunde und Infektionskrankheiten. 
II Abt. Bd. 35, p. 546. 1912. 

308. Shear, C. L. Endothia radicalis (Schw.). Phytopathology. 

Vol. 3, p. 61. February, 1913. 
308a. Shear, 0. L. The type of Sphaeria radicalis Schw. Phyto- 
pathology. Vol. 3, p. 191-192. June, 1913. 

309. Shear, C. L. and Stevens, Neil E. Cultural Characters of the 

Chestnut-Blight Fungus and its Near Relatives. United 
States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant In- 
dustry. Circular 131. 5 July, 1913. 

310. Shear, C. L. and Stevens, Neil E. The Chestnut-Blight Para- 

site (Endothia parasitica) from China. Science. N. S. 
Vol. 38, p. 295-297. 29 August, 1913. 

311. Shrawder, Joseph. Report of the Chemist. Report Pennsyl- 

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De- 
cember 31, 1912. p. 49-50. 1913. 

312. S , H. Hope for the Chestnut Tree. Country Life in 

America. Vol. 24, p. 60. June, 1913. 

313. Smith, J. Russell. The Menace of the Chestnut Blight. Out- 

ing, vol. 61, p. 76-83. October, 1912. 

314. Smith, J. Russell. The Chestnut Blight and Constructive Con- 

servation. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Re- 
port, p. 144-149. 1912. 

315. Sober, Colonel C. K. Discussiou. Report of the Proceedings 

of the Third Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut Grow- 
ers' Association, December IS and 19, 1912. p. 52-53. 
1913. 
315a. Sowerby, James. Sphaeria fluens. Coloured figures of Eng- 
lish fungi or mushrooms. Supplement, plate 420 ( a part 
of plate 438). 1814. 

316. Spaulding, Perley. Notes Upon Tree Diseases in the Eastern 

States. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 93. April, 1912. 

317. Spaulding, Perley. Notes Upon Tree Diseases in the Eastern 

States. Mycologia. Vol. 4, p. 148-151. May, 1912. 
317a. Sprengel, C. Peziza gyrosa. Linnaeus' Systema Vegetabilium. 
Vol. 4, p. 515. 1827. 

318. Sterling, E. A. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Engineering 

News. Vol. 60, p. 332-333. 24 September, 1908. 

319. Sterling, E. A. Are We to Lose Our Chestnut Forests? Coun- 

try Life in America. Vol. 15, p. 44-45. November, 1908. 

320. Stevens, F. L. and Hall, J. G. Bark Disease of the Chestnut. 

Diseases of Economic Plants, p. 436-438. 1910. 



119 

321. Stewart, F. C. Chestnut Canker. New York (Geneva) Agri- 

cultural Experiment Station. Report 1910. p. 219. 16 
January, 1911. 

322. Stewart, F. C. Pointed Paragraphs on Plant Pathology. The 

Western New York Horticultural Society. Proceedings 
of the Fifty-seventh Annual Meeting, p. 109. 24-26 Jan- 
uary, 1912. - 

323. Stewart, F.C. Can the Chestnut Bark Disease Be Controlled ? 

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 
40-45. 1912. 

324. Stoddard, E. M. The Chestnut Tree Blight. The Connecticut 

Farmer. Vol. 41. No. 25. p. 1-2. 24 June, 1911. 

325. Stoddard, E. M. and Moss, A. E. The Chestnut Bark Disease. 

Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 
178. September, 1913. 

326. Stone, G. E. Report of the Botanist. Massachusetts Agricul- 

tural Experiment Station. Twenty-third annual Report, 
p. 76. January, 1911. 

327. Stone, G. E. Diseases More or Less Common During the Year. 

Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station. Twen- 
ty-fourth Annual Report, p. 7. 1912. 
327a. Studhalter, R. A. Insects as carriers of the chestnut blight 
fungus. Abstracts of papers to be given at the fifth an- 
nual meeting of the American Phytopathological Society 
in the State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga., December 30, 1913, 
to January 2, 1914. p. 14-15. 16 December, 1913. 

328. Surface, H. A. The Chestnut Blight or Bark Disease (Dia- 

porthe parasitica Murrill). Bulletin Pennsylvania De- 
partment of Agriculture, Division of Zoology. Vol 2, 
No. 6, p. 236. 

329. Sykes, W. C. Lumbermen and Forestry. American Forestry. 

Vol. 18. p. 271. April, 1912. 

330. Tener, John K. Call to Order and Address of Welcome to 

Delegates and Visiting Friends at the Pennsylvania Chest- 
nut Blight Conference. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight 
Conference Report, p. 15-18. 1912. 

331. Tener, John K. Opening Address at Chestnut Tree Blight 

Conference. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 116. April, 1912. 

332. Thorn, De Courcy W. More About the Blight. Conservation. 

Vol. 15, p. 112. February, 1909. 
332a. Thorne, Charles E. Chestnut Bark Disease. Thirty-second 

Annual Report Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. 

Bulletin 263. July, 1913. 
332b. Thuemen, Felix von. Endothia gyrosum Fuck. f. Castaneae 

vescae. No. 769. Mycotheca universalis, p. 12. 1879. 



120 

333. Traverse, J. B. Flora Italica Cryptogamia. Pars. 1. Fungi. 

Pyrenomyceta. p. 180-182. 15 ottobre, 1906. 
333a. Tulasne, Ludovicus-Kenatus et Tulasne, Carolus. Melogramma 
gyrosum. Selecta fungomm carpologia. Vol. 2, p. 87-89. 
18C3. 

334. Van Kennen, Geo. E., Fleming, James W., and Moore, John 

D. First Annual Report of the Conservation Commission 
New York. 1911. p. 10. 1912. 

335. Vincenz, Freihernn v. Cesati. Die Pflanzenwelt im Gebiete 

zwischen dem Tessin, dem Po, der Sesia und den Alpen. 
Linnaea. Bd. 16. p. 236. 1863. 

336. Von Schrenk, Hermann and Spaulding, Perley. Diseases of 

Deciduous Forest Trees. United States Department of 
Agriculture. Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 149. p. 
22. 30 July, 1909. 

337. Walton, R. C. The relation of temperature to the expulsion of 

ascospores of Endothia parasitica. Abstracts of papers 
to be given at the fifth annual meeting of the American 
Phytopathological Society in the State Capitol, Atlanta, 
Ga., December 30, 1913, to January 2, 1914. p. 14. 16 
December, 1913. 

338. Wells, H. E. A Report on Scout Work on the North Bench 

of Bald Eagle Mountain, between Sylvan Dell and Wil- 
liamsport, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. Pennsyl- 
vania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 235-241. 
1912. 

339. Wentling, J. P. Report of Forester in Charge of Utilization. 

Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, 
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 54-59. 1913. 

340. Whitnall, C. B. The Blight on Chestnut Trees. Conservation. 

Vol. 15, p. 112. February, 1909. 

341. Williams, Henry Smith. Our Doomed Chestnut Trees. Hearst's 

Magazine. Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 102-103. August, 1912. 

342. Williams, I. C. The New Chestnut Bark Disease. Science. 

N. S. Vol. 34, p. 397-400. 29 September, 1911. 

343. Williams, I. C. Additional Facts About the Chestnut Blight. 

Science. N. S. Vol. 34, p. 704-705. 24 November, 1911. 

344. Williams, I. C. The Silvicultural Efifect of the Chestnut Blight. 

Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, 
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 61-63. 1913. 

345. Wilson, James. Studies in Forest Pathology. Report of the 

Secretary. United States Department of Agriculture. 
Yearbook 1910. p. 55. 1911. 



121 

346. Wilson, James. Chestnut Tree Blight. Letter from the Sec- 

retary of Agriculture transmitting in response to Senate 
Eesolution of April 30, 1912, information relative to the 
study and investigation of the so-called Chestnut Tree 
Blight. 62d Congress, 2d Session. Senate document No. 
653. 9 May, 1912. 

347. Winter, Georg. Die Pilze. Kabenhorst's Kryptogamen — 

Flora von Deutschland, Oesterreich und der Schweiz. Bd. 
1. Abt. 2. p. 798, 803. 1887. 

348. W[irt], G. H. The Chestnut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 12, 

p. 188-189. December, 1910. 

349. Woods, A. F. The Wastes of the Farm. United States De- 

partment of Agriculture. Yearbook, 1908. p. 211. 12 
July, 1909. 




LBJe"(5 



(122) 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




002 810 876 A 



i!)l) 1 Itl 1 III I , 

■'i;i I'l 

, ,;i I J 



''■i;:)-( 



i;t: 
; ^ .' , 

[ ;' 


'■',"■ 
■_;;■; 

;; '; 1- 
.1 .i:t[ 



i 


1 







•?m 



■;:<,; .!',i|: 



;'!i!i>; 






ii':;!l;' 



